The Bride! (2026)

On the one hand, kudos to Maggie Gyllenhaal for taking such a bold approach to what you could arguably classify as the full-bodied legacy of Mary Shelley. On the other hand, maybe she should have taken some more time to ensure that her bold approach and mix of ideas could be bundled up into something that would work as a satisfying and cohesive movie experience. This absolutely fails, and the bigger failings help to obscure any of the more praiseworthy elements.

Christian Bale plays Frank (the monster, having taken the name of his creator). He walks into the workplace of Dr. Euphronious (Annette Bening) and asks for her help in creating a companion. He's desperately lonely, and so unique that only another creation similar to himself will offer him any hope of a relationship. Enter the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), a woman who ended up being shot by horrible gangsters mere moments after she was possessed by the spirit of Mary Shelley (also portrayed by Buckley). While struggling to figure out whether or not they can have any kind of proper relationship, especially when trying to accept how it has all begun, Ida and Frank quickly become a notorious pairing, for their unique look and their behaviour. Seemingly unable to stop calling attention to themselves, although often due to calling out the behaviour of others, Frank and The Bride soon find themselves pursued by strangers, determined police, and some gangsters who are very surprised to see that Ida has somehow not stayed dead.

While a very divisive movie, I know there are some people out there who have really liked this. I don't know many of them, but I know one or two. So it works for some people. And I can see some of the appeal. It's very admirably bonkers, almost punk in the way that it makes use of some famous genre archetypes to crash through some other archetypes, all while commenting on misogyny and the constantly overlooked misbehaviour of men. Just typing out that sentence has made me wonder if I am about to be too harsh on the thing. But, alas, no. The ingredients aren't mixed together well enough, and the social commentary is picked up and dropped so casually that it may as well be a toy discarded by an over-stimulated child.

I guess that some of the visuals work, and the cast is full of considerable talent and/or people that Gyllenhaal knows well enough to get on board, but the overriding feeling is that this is a feature barely shaped into a tolerable form by someone seriously overreaching.

Some people appreciate the performance from Buckley, especially when considering the variety of personas that she ends up portraying, but I thought it was never nailed down. Perhaps that is the fault of the screenplay and direction, but Buckley certainly suffers most from the material given to the leads. Bale is okay, if a bit disappointingly low-key. The most interesting main character is actually portrayed by Bening, which makes it all the more frustrating when she is so underused. Jake Gyllenhaal brightens things up a bit with his role, playing a movie star from the era, but I cannot say the same for either Peter Sarsgaard or Penélope Cruz, who are disappointingly weighed down by the fact that their characters are more avatars carrying around some of the central themes than proper characters.

Some may love this, and I am glad that the movie exists for them. I suspect that most will dislike it though, and many will absolutely hate it. I find myself closer to that last grouping, and it's only the ambition and confidence of Gyllenhaal, however it was improperly channelled, that has me rating this just a bit higher than I otherwise would. 

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

Mubi Monday: Adaptation. (2002)

I remember when I first saw Adaptation. Like many people, I loved it. Another collaboration between Charlie Kaufman and Spike Jonze, a great dual role for Nicolas Cage (playing an onscreen version of Kaufman and a fictional twin brother, Donald), and a cast that also includes Meryl Streep, Chris Cooper, and Tilda Swinton, as well as one or two other very familiar faces. What’s not to love?

As almost everyone knows by now, Adaptation. is a film that stemmed from severe writer’s block. Charlie Kaufman was struggling to adapt The Orchid Thief from page to screen, and eventually creates something, with the help of Jonze, that explored his painful creative journey, full of personal insecurity, frustration, and a checklist of things he wanted to avoid.

Here’s the thing I need to say now, ripping the band-aid off (as it were). Adaptation. isn’t actually as great as I remembered it. I am not saying that everyone will agree with me, but there may be a reason why it tends to be forgotten/overlooked in conversations about the respective filmographies of Jonze and Kaufman. It’s not a terrible film, but it’s arguably the least interesting feature to come from either of the main creative forces behind the camera here.

There’s a fine line between making use of something to explore and have fun with various ideas, turning the negatives into major positives, and simply giving yourself an easy option by commenting on everything that you are doing, or are about to do. The former is smart and insightful. The latter is often called “lampshading”, I believe. Revisiting Adaptation. two decades after I first saw it, it simply feels like Lampshade: The Movie. Others may strongly disagree with that, but knowing where the film goes makes all of the dialogue and commentary feel much less enjoyable on a repeat viewing.

At least the cast are well worth your time though. Cage is great, giving a couple of performances that serve as a reminder of why so many people stuck by him through some difficult years. This plays to his preference for nervous energy, but one of his characters is also offset by the circumstances grinding him down. Streep and Cooper both have a lot of fun, playing various versions of their characters that show us written fictions compared to complete “reality”. Alongside the ever-reliable Swinton are the equally excellent Maggie Gyllenhaal, Brian Cox, Judy Greer, and Cara Seymour, to name but a few welcome additions.

There is still a lot to enjoy here, not least of which is the brutal and hilarious honesty in the moments that have Kaufman showing his worries and struggles while facing a typewriter. I still like this, and would watch it again. I just don’t love it, and I don’t think it’s a truly great work any more.

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

Netflix And Chill: The Lost Daughter (2021)

Marking the feature directorial debut of Maggie Gyllenhaal, who also adapted the novel of the same name by Elena Ferrante into script form, The Lost Daughter is very much a film looking at an experience common for most of the female population. It's about motherhood, the expectations placed on women to be the main care providers for children, and the thoughts that people process when they see those expectations being dismissed, either intentionally or unintentionally.

Olivia Colman plays Leda, a professor out to enjoy a bit of a working holiday. She will do some reading and writing, but most of her studying can take place on a sunny beach. Potential peace and bliss is spoiled, however, when a large family take over part of the beach. They aren't nice people, apparently, but Leda refusing to give up her own spot on the beach makes her a curiosity. In turn, Leda cannot stop watching young Nina, a woman struggling with her own daughter. When Nina's daughter goes missing one day, Leda saves the day by finding and returning her. But the child is unhappy, her favourite doll having gone missing while she was on her wanders. Different tensions rise, within Nina, within the extended family, within Leda, and there's a sense that things may go very badly. Perhaps the present is connected to the past, which we see as a younger Leda (played by Jessie Buckley) struggles with motherhood while trying to develop her learning and career.

The first thing to note here is the superb cast. Although I wasn't as won over by Buckley as some others seem to be, she's fine, this is generally a cast of great actors delivering great performances. Colman has been consistently superb for a long time now, way before any awards were handed over to her, and she continues to be arguably flawless in her main roles. Johnson has also been delivering great work over the past few years, outwith her work in the awful "Fifty Shades" movies, and she's excellent here. Ed Harris is a delight, playing the landlord/porter/islander who sees something in Leda that he responds to, and Peter Sarsgaard is enjoyable enough in a few scenes showing his character forming a strong connection with Leda over a shared love of linguistics. There's also a good supporting turn from Paul Mescal as Will, a young man who works at the sunny resort to earn some money in between terms. It's Will who warns Leda about the true nastiness of the people she got away with crossing once, and his character becomes more important in the third act. The story stays with Leda though, meaning most of the scenes focus on either Colman or Buckley.

It's the performances and the ideas in the script that helped to make this bearable. I'm afraid to say that very little else worked for me. Gyllenhaal does well in her choice to not spoonfeed the audience, allowing characters to behave erratically at times without making their motives obvious, but she indulges herself too often with an artistic and "breathy" approach to the shooting style that detracts from the bittersweet core of the film. Everything that isn't the actual acting, from the Dickon Hinchliffe music to the cinematography by Hélène Louvart, seems to be trying hard to undermine the acting. The film is a well-cast piece of work almost entirely undone by the pretentious errors of an earnest first-time feature director behind the camera.

As hesitant as I am to recommend this to people, it also remains just about worth your time. For now. There's a better film to be made about this, a film for anyone who has ever felt the urge to throttle someone saying "any children?" or "never mind, plenty time yet to start a family". Images of women defined only by motherhood are everywhere, it's a societal bias that I don't think will ever disappear, and art that fights back against that is important. It gives a voice to those who don't have that maternal urge, for whatever reason, and it reminds people that women are more than JUST wives and mothers.

The Lost Daughter could have easily been called The Lost Mother, The Lost Years, The Lost Love, The Lost Chances, or any of a dozen other titles. But it could also be referred to as The Lost Opportunity, subjectively speaking.

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.
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

Mubi Monday: The Kindergarten Teacher (2018)

The second feature from writer-director Sara Colangelo, a remake of a 2014 movie, The Kindergarten Teacher is all about, funnily enough, a kindergarten teacher (Lisa, played by Maggie Gyllenhaal) who becomes quite obsessed with a young boy, Jimmy Roy (Parker Sevak), who seems to have a knack for poetry. Lisa wants Jimmy Roy to have the freedom to reach his full potential, which starts her on a path that leads to selfishness, awkwardness, and damaged relationships.

Although specifically about the journey of Lisa, both using Jimmy Roy and also trying her best to get him to develop his talent, The Kindergarten Teacher is more generally about the frustration of a soul wanting a life in pursuit of art and culture, and wanting to encourage others to do the same. Lisa initially seems very sweet and supportive, but it quickly becomes clear that her approach is guided by her own agenda, as opposed to what Jimmy Roy may want for his own life.

Colangelo, her screenplay based on that from Nadav Lapid, plays things just right, creeping in close when Lisa starts to focus more on Jimmy Roy, staying there for some quieter conversations that are designed not to be heard by the other children, and then pulling back slightly to show the two of them together, often highlighting just how much one child is being separated from a larger group that may keep him in a more suitable environment, allowing him to simply be a child.

Tricky material to handle, things are elevated by the central performances. Gyllenhaal is excellent, managing to just about keep viewers on board, even as her behaviour becomes more and more unacceptable. Sevak gives a wonderful turn, often acting sweetly oblivious to the inappropriate actions of one of the main adults in his life. Gael García Bernal stands out as the teacher of a poetry class, unwittingly motivating Lisa, who starts to test the waters by sharing the poems from Jimmy Roy, while claiming them as her own. Michael Chernus plays Grant Spinelli, the husband of Lisa, and does good work, as does everyone else with their name in the credits, but any scenes not featuring Gyllenhaal and Sevak tend to end up feeling like so much padding. They are the heart of the film, in terms of the ideas being explored and the strongest performances, and they make the whole thing worth watching, even during the times when you may want to cringe and turn it off.

Far from perfect, and many viewers will lose patience with the lead character before I did, this is still one to give your time to, a thought-provoking rumination on what it takes to fan a childish spark of creativity into a life-long passion for the pursuit of art, but equally a reminder to let children be children, because their world-view and innocence, their ability to keep hold of what we may have lost on our way to adulthood, is not for our benefit. It's just all part of being a child.

7/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: Secretary (2002)

Sex. It's hard to deny that the world could be a better, happier place if so many people weren't so uptight about sex, whether that leads to them trying to move sex workers further and further to the edges of society, where they are more likely to be abused and harmed, or spending the vast majority of their time concerning themselves about the contents of someone else's underpants. And then you have the people who either judge others for their likes and dislikes, or spend a lot of their time unhappy because they haven't actively discussed some sexual preferences that give them more satisfaction than what some may call "vanilla" sex.

Secretary is about someone discovering themselves with the help of someone else, it's about a shared love of a certain lifestyle, or small choices made when the lifestyle allows, and it's a film that gets more right about the mindset of those involved than any of the few mainstream movies that have tried to venture into this territory (and it's ironic that James Spader plays a character named Mr. Grey).

Maggie Gyllenhaal plays a young woman named Lee who starts the movie by leaving an institution that has clearly been trying to help her with her mental health. Lee goes through some training to be a secretary, and then ends up in the employment of Mr. Grey (Spader). Things start off fairly standard, but one or two moments lead to both employer and employee exploring, and enjoying, a closer relationship that allows them to explore their shared kinks.

Based on a short story by Mary Gaitskill, which was adapted by director Steven Shainberg and writer Erin Cressida Wilson, Secretary is constantly walking a tightrope that it admirably never slips on. That's not to say it does everything perfectly, but it keeps moving without giving a second thought to any minor wobbles or near-misses. And the more troublesome elements, including the mental health background of Lee before she finds something that truly satisfies her while it scratches an itch she didn't realise was there, aren't so troublesome when you consider that a) a lot of people DO find themselves suffering mentally before they allow themselves to more fully explore something that easily makes them happier, and b) while Gyllenhaal is shown as submissive, to use one of the labels she is given, the script takes care to show that what is going on is communicated subtly between the two in ways that make it consensual, and also shows that submissives have just as much, if not more, control in any effective sexual dynamic.

Both of the leads are as good as you'd expect, with Gyllenhaal making a strong impression early on in her career while Spader does the kind of kinky SOB he's played effortlessly for decades (even in roles that didn't say anything about his character . . . he always played them like a kinky SOB). Lesley Ann Warren and Stephen McHattie are fine in their small supporting roles, the parents who are concerned about their daughter, but also don't necessarily know what's best for her, and Jeremy Davies is very sweet as Peter, a young man who may want to have a relationship with Lee, but may not be the right person to manage to scratch that constant little itch.

Although Secretary may seem, on the surface, as if it is designed to appeal to a very specific viewer demographic, that's not the case. You just need to adjust your perspective slightly. The script and direction work together to make everything clear, with wit and the nice subtleties of the character interactions helping everything along, and what you have is ultimately an offbeat, but still quite sweet, romantic film for those who don't really like romantic films.

And if none of it makes any sense to you, maybe read up further on kinks and fetishes, without judging others or eagerly dismissing it as evil filth. At the very least, you might read some unusual anecdotes from some very cool people.

9/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can get a shiny disc here.

Frank (2014)

Christopher Sievey was a talented, creative artist who many people, including myself, would never have recognised if we passed on the street. That's because he became better known as Frank Sidebottom, a character easily recognised by his oversized, paper-mache head. Frank would still sing, but was more often to be found delivering comedy to audiences who would be equally amused and bemused by such a quirky character.

This movie is based on him, but not JUST him. The main character is an amalgamation of Sievey/Sidebottom and one or two other notable musicians. A lot of material was gleaned from the writings of Jon Ronson, who helped to craft the script, but it's also set in the here and now, instead of the late '80s and early '90s (when Frank was, arguably, at the height of his popularity). So it's a fictional biopic about a man, with some other personality traits added from other unique artists, all embodied by someone wearing a large, paper-mache head. Clear enough? Good.

Domhnall Gleeson plays Jon Burroughs, a young man who strives to work at his music when he's not stuck in the drudgery of everyday life. It looks as if fortune has smiled upon him when he's in the right place at the right time - near the beach where a keyboard player is trying to drown himself - to be invited to play with an eccentric pop band, fronted by Frank (Michael Fassbender, face hidden from sight for most of the movie). But perhaps he should have spent more time considering just what would drive the previous band member to a suicide attempt. If there's a choice between an easy path and a hard one it looks as if Frank wants the band to take the hard path every time. But Jon thinks he can change things for the band. He thinks that, thanks to his updates on Twitter and YouTube, he has created a decent following for them. He's not the first person to think that he can change the direction of the band, and Frank seems receptive to things, but the others warn him against the move. And it would seem that the others have been through this sort of thing before.

I know how ridiculous it may seem, but this film benefits immensely from yet another great performance from Fassbender. He may well be hidden away under that fake head, but his voice and body language convey plenty. Gleeson does well to keep a straight face opposite him, as do the rest of the band members (Francois Civil, Carla Azar, Scoot McNairy and Maggie Gyllenhaal). In the role of Clara, Gyllenhaal is probably the most important supporting player. Her character is often hostile, sometimes violent, but always with the best interests of Frank at heart.

Crucially, the film creates a great aural landscape to accompany the visuals. It may not be a great soundtrack, in the classical sense, but I found many of the tunes and sound mixes very enjoyable. I'm not sure how many, if any, are based on actual works by Frank and co. but they certainly feel in line with the spirit of the artists.

Capturing the essence of someone isn't always that easy. Director Lenny Abrahamson has managed to do it here. Helped by the script, from Ronson and Peter Straughan, this is a look at a particular type of creative mind. It tries to peek behind the mask of one unique individual, despite the fact that the individual incorporates characteristics from a few different people, and then shows that maybe it's best just to stop prying. If the man maketh the mask, and the mask then maketh the man, why even try to disturb the balance by separating the two?

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 

April Fools: Cecil B. DeMented (2000)

John Waters is a fun guy. His career spans decades and he remains defiantly subversive and independent. In fact, Waters himself might agree that the fact that he HAS such a lengthy career defies the odds. He doesn't make movies for the mainstream, but instead aims squarely for the awkward, the odd, the unbalanced, the outsiders, and the fiercely individual. AKA the cool people. Bizarrely, the mainstream sometimes picks up what he lays down. I'm thinking mainly of the stage show and movie remake that stemmed from Hairspray. There was also no small amount of love shown for Serial Mom when it came out, but maybe I was just finding more friends who appreciated Waters at that point.

Anyway, I should really start talking about Cecil B. DeMented. It's a film that, in some ways, seems perfectly designed to appeal to the mainstream, hence my opening ramble, but in every other way it's quintessentially Waters (who has Hollywood squarely in his sights).

Stephen Dorff is Cecil, a young artist frustrated with the entertainment world around him. Blockbusters rub shoulders with lame remakes and lame sequels, and that needs to change. Which is why he kidnaps the famous Honey Whitlock (Melanie Griffith). Forcing her to act in his movie, Cecil explains his aim and Honey eventually starts to come around to his way of thinking. But will anyone else, aside from his small group of loyal followers?

With a lot of great, albeit easy, gags and a cast that mixes a couple of well-known names with some relative "unknowns" such as Jack Noseworthy, Adrian Grenier, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Michael Shannon, Cecil B. DeMented is unlikely to be anyone's favourite John Waters movie, but it's one that I can happily revisit and never tire of. The slim runtime helps - it barely edges over the 80 minute mark - and the rest of the cast, including Alicia Witt and Lawrence Gilliard Jr, also do their bit, with plenty of enthusiasm making up for any failings in actual acting expertise. Dorff is great in the lead role, but Griffith also deserves some credit for putting herself in the midst of such madness.

Despite the thin layer of polish on everything, this is still a biting, anarchic, and interesting work from a writer-director who rarely, if ever, lets me down. The fact that he's only given us one more movie since this one in the last fifteen years is a great shame, and I hope that he's not finished warping our minds just yet.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cecil-Demented-DVD-Melanie-Griffith/dp/B006C0TX8M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1397077920&sr=8-1&keywords=cecil+b+demented

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)

Will Ferrell may not be the kind of comic actor you can imagine moving smoothly into more dramatic roles, but he does a very good job playing Harold Crick in this movie, a gentle comedy that mixes in some wonderful ideas and a few nice twists and turns.

Harold Crick works for the IRS and lives his life in numbers. He always brushes his teeth a set number of times, he can always answer any mathematical problems thrown at him by colleagues and he stays on quite a predictable, some might say boring, schedule. This all changes completely when Harold starts to hear a voice narrating his every move. Harold seeks help from Professor Jules Hilbert (Dustin Hoffman), who endeavours to help him find out what kind of story he is being made a part of and how it might end. Meanwhile, Harold also falls for a young woman (Maggie Gyllenhaal) that he's been tasked with auditing and starts to really enjoy his life for the first time ever. This doesn't register with writer Karen Eiffel (Emma Thompson), who is busy trying to get over her writer's block with the help of an optimistic assistant, Penny Escher (Queen Latifah). Karen doesn't need optimism. She often gets inspiration from sickness, from pain. From death.

Director Marc Forster uses a number of great little tricks to make the most of Zach Helm's smart and gently amusing script. Measurements and numbers appear all over the place in the first section of the movie, allowing viewers to get caught up in the details that govern the life of Harold Crick, the narration provides comedy and also tension and there are many enjoyable callbacks to little details throughout the film.

As already mentioned, Ferrell does well in the lead role, but he has the benefit of a superb supporting cast around him. That's not to sell him short though. His everyman turn here may be the best that he's ever done, in my view, and he makes for a likeable and sympathetic lead. Gyllenhaal is a lot of fun in her role, a woman who wants to choose just where her tax dollars go, and Hoffman is even more enjoyable as he gets to grips with Harold's problem and tries to tick off a variety of literary possibilities. Thompson and Latifah are, for the most part, separate from the central story strand, but they're important characters, of course, and both do very well in their roles.

Overall, Stranger Than Fiction manages to please a lot of different people; those looking for something a bit different from the norm, those looking for something clever, those looking for something with warm humour to it, those looking for something with a bit of romance and those looking for a film that will remind them, funnily enough, of the power of a good book.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stranger-Than-Fiction-Blu-ray-Region/dp/B000NDETHE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1359497646&sr=8-3