Mubi Monday: Queer (2024)

I have some big problems with Queer, and writing this review may help me to figure out if the problems stem from myself or from director Luca Guadagnino and writer Justin Kuritzkes. Actually, it may be the fault of William S. Burroughs, who seems to have filtered elements of his life through his books in ways that become repetitive and self-cannibalising.

Daniel Craig plays William Lee, a slightly older American man who now lives in Mexico City and spends a lot of his time trawling bars for younger men he might enjoy some nights of sexual activity with. I have deliberately used the word "trawling" there because Lee is a man very much casting a wide net in order to catch the occasional prize specimen. He believes that he has found a winner in Eugene Allerton (Drew Starkey), the two of them ending up in a relationship that allows them to explore their bodies, take some drugs together that may help them explore their own minds and souls, and generally develop different kinds of dependence.

Hot and sweaty, and often soaked in booze, this is the kind of film that emanates a heat you can feel coming off the screen. Whether sitting in the humid bars or being naked and hungry in bed, the main characters always seem to be coated in a sheen of perspiration. This is what the film does well, conveying that sense of heat (both external and internal), and the feeling of someone moving through it with only occasional moments of real connection that distract them from their own repeating cycle of numbing alcohol and sometimes-equally-numbing sex.

Craig and Starkey are both very good in their roles, with the former managing to deliver an accent that he keeps just far enough away from his iconic cadence he has made part of his character in the Knives Out movies. The supporting cast doesn't have too many familiar faces scattered throughout, but there's room for Jason Schwartzman, Henrique Zaga, and Lesley Manville, as well as some fine work from those who are less recognisable.

I don't think the problem here lies with me, although that's not something I get to say too often. I think the main issue with the film is that everyone seems to be repeating themselves. Guadagnino has covered very similar territory in a number of his previous features, and Burroughs, well, his exploration of himself is less interesting, cinematically, than, for example, Charles Bukowski's exploration of others who end up sharing barstools alongside him, or Hubert Selby Jr.'s exploration of those chasing a high to block out the trashheap around them. And you can get a much more interesting journey through his hazy and fractured mind by choosing to watch/rewatch Naked Lunch, which I highly recommend.

There's some good atmosphere and some good performances, and I am sure that some will appreciate the themes of sexuality and looking for companionship, but there's just not enough here to recommend it ahead of many other films based on the works of those namechecked here, or even ahead of most other films from Guadagnino.

5/10.

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, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
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

Challengers (2024)

A film all about tennis, except that it’s not really all about tennis. It’s all about sex, obsession, and power. But it’s also about tennis.

Mike Faist and Josh O’Connor play Art and Patrick, two tennis players who used to be very good friends. Their lives have gone in very different directions, however, and now Art is a pro trying to recover his form while Patrick is trying to win enough money to keep himself able to buy non-luxury items, like food. Both end up in a challenger tournament, and both end up playing against one another, observed by Tashi (Zendaya). Tasha is married to Art, but she is also very familiar with Patrick. Things may become messy and complicated, but it’s important to remember that this film is set in a world of tennis . . . where love equals zero.

Written by Justin Kuritzkes, his first major screenplay, this is a vibrant and steamy look at people who are pushing one another in different directions, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. The material is elevated by Luca Gaudagnino’s electric direction, and a strange score from Atticus Ross and Trent Reznor that sometimes fits the visuals, but also sometimes just feels a bit jarring, yet now in a way that spoils the marriage between sight and sound.

The cast also help, absolutely fantastic in roles that allow them to relish being single-minded and fairly unpleasant for most of the runtime. Faist feels like the weakest of the three characters (in his nature, not in his performance), but his journey remains an intriguing one. O’Connor has more hunger in his eyes, although he also has some obvious failings that have held him back over the years. And then there’s Zendaya, casting a large shadow over these two men in a way that they don’t even fully realise until it is too late. Her turn here is wonderfully gritty and dispassionate, portraying someone who has decided to put all of her energy and effort into the career of someone else after her own dream came to a very sudden end.

Told in a non-chronological way, my main criticism is that there are some time jumps that feel a bit unnecessary, although everything becomes clear as you get used to the structure of the film. It feels like the right way to have done things though, especially by the time we get to a brilliantly satisfying finale. Momentum builds, camerawork is dizzyingly brilliant, and there’s a proper crescendo before everything ends, as should be the way of any great tennis match.

I wouldn’t say this is the best film for anyone involved, apart from Kuritzkes (so far), but it’s very good stuff. It’s sweaty, sexy, strange, and occasionally surprising. It’s certainly one of the best films about tennis that I can think of, despite it not really being about tennis.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Prime Time: Bones And All (2022)

There might be some who would view Bones And All, a romantic drama that shows some people trying to live with a cannibalistic urge, and take the life lessons aspect of it to come up with the pithy alternative title of Hannibal Lecture, but I would be beyond that kind of pathetic attempt at an easy pun, of course.

Director Luca Guadagnino has made great use of a script by David Kajganich, adapting a novel by Camille DeAngelis, to deliver a film that feels impressively grim at times while also feeling very much like a typical Luca Guadagnino film. I find his work very often misses the mark slightly, but this is one of his better outings (although I must note here that I have sadly still to watch the much-praised Call Me By Your Name).

Taylor Russell plays Maren, a girl who has spent her lifetime moving around with, and being protected by, her father (André Holland, offscreen quickly enough, but also delivering some great voiceover work). Her father cannot stick around, however, and he leaves Maren with some advice and information. Traveling alone around the country, Maren meets others just like her, some that seem good (Lee, played by Timothée Chalamet) and some that seem like trouble (including Sully, played by Mark Rylance). Oh, I forgot to mention that Maren is overtaken sometimes by the urge to eat human flesh. Lee, Sully, and others also have the same condition, but not everyone views it as a problem.

The strangest thing about Bones And All, and I am going to assume that this was just me own brain causing problems, was the fact that it kept feeling like a Doctor Sleep offshoot to me. Some plot points are similar, although those same plot points can be found in many other movies, but it was the atmosphere and characters that somehow made me think I was watching something from a world written by Stephen King. I would love to hear from anyone who had a similar reaction, especially if this is a common observation. Otherwise, I will just chalk it up to another example of me being me.

Getting to what the movie is, instead of what my mind kept trying to make it, the cast all work well with the material. Russell is very good in the lead role, believably trying to cope with an unnatural appetite that others have spent time embracing. Chalamet isn’t bad, if less instantly convincing in his role (Chalamet often feels more like Chalamet than a credible new character), and Rylance plays his part so well that he casts a long shadow over most of the film, even without actually being onscreen for more than a handful of scenes. I have already complimented Holland, as the father who discovers his breaking point, and there are a number of effective turns from cast members only given a scene or two in which to make a strong impression. Michael Stuhlberg and David Gordon Green are two highlights, and Chloë Sevigny is another.

Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross create another great score, there’s clean and pleasing cinematography courtesy of Arseni Khachaturan, and every decision made allows for the more horrific moments to be presented in a way that shows restraint without complete shying away from the blood and violence (or the bones and all).

Although falling slightly between two stools, despite the best efforts of all involved, Bones And All is a strange and enjoyable drama that just happens to show people with some very peculiar dietary requirements. I liked it, but I am not sure who I would recommend it to.

7/10

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

Mubi Monday: Suspiria (2018)

There's no such thing as an untouchable classic, when it comes to movies, but that still doesn't stop you from receiving certain news with trepidation. And when I heard that this remake of Suspiria was finally coming to fruition, I had the same reaction as many others. Why bother? What could be done to improve on the original? How bad would it end up being? Then I started to hear some advance word and some views from people I trusted, a lot of them saying that the film was, amazingly, good. Not just good, but also great. And not just great as a film, but even great in comparison to the original. Well, curiosity got the better of me, as I knew it would, and I headed along as soon as I could to see what all the fuss was about.

Dakota Johnson plays Susie Bannion, a young woman who makes quite an impression from her very first appearance in a ballet school she has long dreamed of attending. The main teacher is Madame Blanc (Tilda Swinton), and she takes a major interest in Susie, viewing her as the potential conduit for a performance/ceremony that is necessary for the continuing good of the witches. Oh yes, the ballet school has a high number of witches on the staff, all working in service of the powerful Mother Of Sighs, and Susie is a valuable asset to all of them.

Director Luca Guadagnino has certainly created an impressive work of art here. The visuals are often absolutely gorgeous, from the many mirrored surfaces to the shots of bare feet working on smooth wooden floors, from the nightmare sequences depicted to a brutal blend of dance and physical assault that will leave most viewers stunned (it's the first, and arguably only, big horror moment). Accompanied by a fine score from Thom Yorke, it's difficult to fault the style and aesthetic of the movie, for the most part. There were times while watching this movie where I was trying to take in every single detail, even if the framing left a lot of the screen full of relatively empty space. Mirrors play a big part in things, and not just the obvious reflections that contain the dancers in their main space, but there's a constant, pleasing, mix of limbs, muscles, and undulating lines.

The cast who cause a lot of those lines all deserve heaps of praise, especially the younger contingent. This is the best that I've ever seen Johnson, delivering a performance so impressive that I'll now seek out the rest of her filmography (even those damn Grey films), and she's given great support by Mia Goth, playing a dancer named Sara who starts to get a bit too curious after the absence of Patricia (Chloe Grace Moretz, doing well with a smaller role). Tilda Swinton is good, no denying that, but her performance is either far too similar to so many other performances we have seen from her or just completely unnecessary and self-indulgent.

And, speaking of completely unnecessary and self-indulgent, the script by David Kajganic is a real mess. There's no need for this film to be as long as it is, one main sub-plot feels completely unnecessary (and I know that some people may use that criticism to accuse me of missing the whole point of it - I got it, the film really didn't need it), and the whole thing is unbalanced by the fact that Susie always comes across as knowing that something is strange, yet never being put off by the strangeness. She is, in fact, drawn to it, unafraid and eager to find her place somewhere in the world that she immediately feels comfortable in. If the film was striding along a very different path from the original, which it does at times, then it wouldn't seem so bad. Sadly, it brings to mind too many comparisons, suffering when you think of the atmosphere created in the original, and the finale that Argento made as wild and vivid as this one is just overblown and silly.

You can't spend one minute trying to invert Suspiria and then the next running parallel to it, even going so far as to placing an obvious cameo appearance in there that will a) please some people, b) make others (like me) roll their eyes at the cynical attempt to get some easy goodwill, or c) not be recognised by younger viewers who may perhaps check this out before the original.

Yet I'll still rewatch this film, for the performance of Johnson and the dance sequences alone. I'll buy it and sit it on a shelf alongside the original. And I'll encourage people to make their own minds up about it. But I'll be ready to share this review and argue vehemently if they try to sell it as a remake equal to, or even superior than, the original.

6/10

You can get the original movie here.
Americans can get it here.