Change Your Image
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmM0MzM2MzQtYTAxZi00MzVjLThkYzAtMjMxMGE5ODA0ZGNjXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjc2MjY1OA@@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
mattfg
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Notre paradis (2011)
Very sexy exploration of intergenerational gay male lust/love and violence
I first saw this film at Inside Out in Toronto. It was amazingly sexy, if not often nasty. I enjoyed the frequent nudity by young, angelic Dimitri Durdaine throughout the film (to date, his only credit here on IMDb.) The story was shocking. I wasn't quite sure what motivated Vassili, the slightly older male prostitute killer to kill some of his clients, besides perhaps an unbelievably short temper after receiving mild insults from clients unhappy with his age. If there were other reasons motivating him to kill, the script never mentioned them.
The film is polished and beautiful to watch. At its core, it seems to be a sexy exploration of intergenerational relationships between gay men and the violent consequences of exploitation. The affair between Vassili and Angelo is one such relationship - a 33 year old hustler and a 19 year old hustler. You combine that with the older male johns going after the young hustlers, not to mention the older former john of Vassili named Victor and his much younger/30-something live-in lover, and the intergenerational theme becomes obvious. Vassili's relationship with young Angelo (Durdaine) is the only tender and loving coupling on display. Vassili's violence is perhaps the symbolic end result of all this exploitation and fleeting lust. How else can an ageing hustler react to all this crap except to lash out with violence against those who no longer want him the way they used to? If you watch this simply as a lovely exploration of youthful beauty (and there is a lot of it on display) and the violent consequences of exploitation, you will enjoy it.
Again, Durdaine is stunning in this, no more than 19 or 20, the perfect twink, and he spends most of the movie naked, including a strangely erotic scene in which a kind and older (yet again) gay male doctor shoves a camera tube up Durdaine's ass during a health examination in order to probe the young lad's inner rectum, ostensibly to search for damage from a possible rape. Instead, he finds his insides as 'smooth as silk' to look at. Not only do we get to probe every inch of Durdaine's exterior, we also get a peek inside him as well. Thankfully, Stephane Rideau, still cute as hell, also shows everything off, but far less than Durdaine.
In truth, the movie spends as much time exploiting its subjects as it does lamenting that exploitation and the consequences of it (as evidenced through the metaphor of violence.) In that sense, the film doesn't judge the old for lusting after the young; in fact, it revels in it. All in all, this is one sexy, dirty little adventure with A-quality male nudity on display throughout, as well as a titillating story about the consequences of exploitation.
5 out of 10 for the story, but 10 out of 10 for the eye candy.
Another Year (2010)
Judgmental, a bit mean...but great performances by cast
Mike Leigh's latest experiment shows off a very likable, well-adjusted, professionally and romantically successful couple played by Ruth Sheen and Jim Broadbent over the course of one year. During that time, they show waning kindness to friend and co-worker Mary, played by Lesley Manville, who can't seem to get her life right no matter what she tries, is completely self-involved and has a bit too much fondness for wine. There's another male friend played by Peter Wight who is just as pathetic, unmarried, alcoholic and hopeless.
They also have a son who at 30 is single at the outset. Then at some unseen point between spring and summer (or was it summer and autumn?), he magically gets a sweet and boring girlfriend, who Mary immediately despises because she secretly has a crush on the younger man.
Manville is stunning in her role, but her character never grows and learns and just rots before us. It was sad to watch. She was pathetic and seemingly incapable of self-reflection. In the end, she's almost destroyed her friendship with Ruth Sheen's character but seems oblivious. The last shot shows her jealously looking around the dinner table at yet another meal (to which she's basically invited herself) as the happy family sit around being as jovial as ever.
If you want to see some lucky, well-adjusted people sit around tolerating unlucky, badly-drawn friends who also happen to be alcoholics, this is your film. Mike Leigh usually works with his actors to build characters and stories through improvisation. Sadly, they seemed to have created interesting characters at the outset, but all of them spend the next two plus hours of the film marching in place, never changing, never growing, experiencing little if any crises except perhaps growing intolerance for Manville.
Why were Sheen and Broadbent so lucky in love? Why did their son magically also find love seemingly without any effort, it just fell into his lap? Are they just lucky, or were the single people in their lives doing something wrong? The only answer Leigh gives is perhaps a fondness for alcohol or other vices by the singletons. We all know that finding love is a crap shoot. Yet here, those who find themselves single in their 50s and unhappy seem to receive special scorn and are given zero chance to improve themselves in this story. The best we get is Sheen telling Manville she needs to seek professional help.
Simplistic, judgmental and a little pointless. Leigh did inspire much thought in me after seeing this. But unfortunately, Leigh's devices here seem incredibly unfair and without merit.
La battue (2008)
Astonishing
I saw this at the Top Ten Canadian short films screening for 2008.
I don't think I'll ever forget this film about a mother who routinely forces her troubled daughter to go hunting.
The performance of the daughter is unforgettable, she spends most of her time awkwardly struggling through the woods carrying the rifle, moaning and whimpering after she complains to her uncaring mother how much she "hates the land."
Much is unsaid in this film, leaving it up to the audience to take from it what they will. I certainly took in a lot, including the hell that some parents can make of their children's lives when they force their own pastimes onto them.
The cinematography is also beautiful in this. The tracking shots, particularly the big one at the end, are mesmerizing.
United 93 (2006)
Exceptional and cathartic
I hesitated watching this great movie. But now I'm glad I got up the nerve to sit through this exceptional piece of art.
Greengrass walked through a minefield and created a masterpiece with this movie. His nomination for Best Director at the Oscars is so well deserved.
I find myself viewing this movie again and again, I can't get it out of my mind. You've probably heard the many descriptions about how Greengrass's touch is pseudo-documentary in tone and style, a fly on the wall approach. We literally can't tell which players in this movie are actors and which ones are the real thing (with the exception of Ben Sliney and others).
The depiction of the plane's passengers is heartfelt and subtle. Even the terrorists are fleshed out in such a way to provide greater insight into the evil things they did that day. Jamie Harding is excellent as the youngest terrorist who is so obviously filled with such self-righteous fanaticism that he, along with the others, could see the evil they were doing as somehow justified and an act of Allah/God.
The looks on the faces of the players on the ground remind me of my own reaction - stunned disbelief and shock. Can this really be happening? It is enormously emotionally satisfying to see the passengers fight back as they do, as I hope I would do if I were there on the plane with them. The final moments of this movie are absolutely gripping and unforgettable.
I can't imagine a more accomplished, more fitting treatment of the September 11th tragedy than this one.
Mysterious Skin (2004)
Araki's masterpiece
This is Araki's best film yet, in my opinion. It's clear that he's very much in control of his craft. Joseph Gordon-Levitt not only confirms his beauty in this film, but also his amazing acting talent - he plays a gay hustler from Kansas who was a victim of child abuse. Despite the tough subject matter, it's an extremely sexy and effective performance, complete with some rear nude scenes. The rest of the cast is quite good - Brady Corbet matches Gordon-Levitt's performance in skill, playing the other, asexual side of the pair who suspects he was once abducted by aliens. What a magnificent metaphor. Handled with honesty and sensitivity, it's one of the most beautiful films you'll ever see on the tragic subject of childhood sexual abuse.
Because the story focuses on both a gay male character (Gordon Levitt) and a straight/asexual male (Corbet) as its primary subjects, it gives us a fuller perspective on the issue. We see how the abuse screws up Levitt's life, while the same events have a significantly different impact on Corbet's life. This film is a beautiful treatise AGAINST pedophilic abuse. While it's difficult to watch at times, it makes its point more eloquently than most films on this subject.
The Queen (2006)
Exquisite, subtle, compassionate, extraordinary
Helen Mirren's performance will likely win her an Oscar and she is most deserving of one for this role. You literally forget you're watching Mirren in this film - so subtle and so effective is her portrait of the living monarch. She manages to humanize the public figure, but still maintains her considerable dignity and mystique at the same time.
Kudos to Stephen Frears for making so many intelligent choices in his direction: while the real Royal family might not appreciate the attention that this film presents, I would highly doubt they would take great offense to any of their portrayals in this film. It is honest and classy, without being exploitative.
I especially appreciated Frears' decision to almost show nothing of the boys, William and Harry. We only see Charles comforting them the night of Diana's death, and catch glimpses of them once or twice more, but absolutely no dialogue. In a film that delves into the inner minds of the main players at such a tragic time, it was a classy choice not to turn the boys into film characters for this plot. It wasn't necessary.
Instead, we focus on the real heart of this film - the tension between conservative tradition and modern sensibilities. The contrast between the Queen and PM Tony Blair is a perfect metaphor for this conflict.
But it isn't all cut and dry, of course. The Queen is also portrayed here as stubborn and perhaps a little naive about the growing public mood sweeping the world following Diana's tragic death. Little of the Queen's well-documented and well-founded disdain for Diana is emphasized here. For those with a strong sense of history, we understand already what happened between Charles and Diana and how things went so poorly.
The best scene in the film - when the Queen's jeep gets stuck in the river on her Balmoral estate and she spots a beautiful stag nearby. Later she learns the stag has been shot dead by hunters and she goes to see the body at a neighbouring estate to pay her respects in a way. What a beautiful metaphor! I have little doubt that this film will be seen as one of the best of the year. In addition to Mirren's Oscar nomination and likely win, I see 'The Queen' having an excellent chance at a Best Picture nod and many other nominations, including screenplay. Well done to EVERYONE involved.
Death of a President (2006)
Very telling portrait of the Bush legacy told with great restraint.
I am no fan of George W. Bush, but when I heard about this film, I wondered if its central hypothesis would come across as exploitative and unnecessary, or if the "assassination" would serve the "narrative" and illuminate some greater theme. It is quite provocative, obviously, to make a movie such as this. The question for me walking into the theatre was, "Is killing Bush in this movie necessary?" I do have to say that the filmmakers handled this project with sensitivity and an obviously deep and intelligent understanding of the American political climate.
The film succeeds on a number of levels - first it gives the audience a bird's eye view of an event for which the public would normally have few if any visuals.
Second, Bush is portrayed positively in this - we see him at his most human and likable when delivering what was a real speech in Chicago. Bush is clearly not the buffoon many make him out to be, he's an expert at playing against type. The image of Bush we see before the assassination is quite positive. Therefore, the murder is indeed tragic.
The filmmakers wisely sidestep what would be typical (and uninteresting) coverage of a country in mourning and instead focus on the criminal investigation. We see how the FBI and other forces would be under extreme pressure to make an arrest. Their investigation leads them to an employee of Syrian descent who works in the building beside the hotel outside which Bush was shot. They delve into this man's past and find out he spent time in Afghanistan and may have had links to terrorists - despite the almost complete lack of forensic evidence, the rush to judgment is complete.
We know that if this scenario were to play out this is exactly how it would happen. The man would be convicted in the public's eyes - and his incarceration would serve the U.S. administration's political goals. When Dick Cheney is sworn in as President, his first response is to pressure the FBI to find a link between the assassination and Syria's government. Echoes of Cheney looking to capitalize on another national tragedy (9/11) in order to fulfil a political and economic goal (depose Saddam Hussein) are clear.
Without giving too much away, the film brilliantly implies that the real culprit in the assassination was a Desert Storm veteran who lost a son in the current Iraq war, driven by hatred to kill the President.
Was it necessary to kill Bush in this film? Perhaps the metaphor of killing the monster by slicing off its head, only to see it grow back another even worse is appropriate here. The film seems to be saying that Bush has created a legacy where a national tragedy can be used to justify criminal acts and wars with no connection to the original events - that the truth will always be buried if it doesn't complement the political and ideological goals of the powers that be.
In the end, while the real assassin's identity is implied, it's never entirely clear who did it. An appropriate ending as we, the public, typically are forced to live with confusion and misinformation over the events that shape our countries and our lives, never knowing for sure what really happened, only what our governments have told us to believe.
Brokeback Mountain (2005)
New American classic love story
I was lucky to get a ticket to the second screening of Brokeback Mountain at the Toronto Int'l Film Fest in September, months before the well-deserved hype kicked in. This is an absolutely beautiful movie. From a gay man's perspective, the love story was both satisfying and heart-breaking.
Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal give equally moving and accomplished performances, although the story tends to focus more on Ledger's character. Heath is note perfect in this role. I didn't detect a false moment once from him. Regardless of whether or not he wins the Oscar, his performance in this movie will be watched and admired for years to come as a landmark in acting. I truly related to his character's internalized homophobia. Every gay man has been there before. In many ways, he represents the embodiment of shame and self-hate, a product of his American, western culture. The flashback showing his father take him as a boy to look at the dead body of some murdered gay man should be shown to every Christian fundamentalist out there who ever argued (and continue to argue) that homosexuality is a choice and that gay men and lesbians are nurtured by their environment. I've seen the movie three times now, and Heath brings tears to my eyes every time - he's so good.
Jake is also incredible, sweet, nuanced, loving. He had the difficult part of being essentially the "love interest" rather than the main character. By the end, he personifies the tragedy of hopes that never come to be - as captured perfectly by Lee with the cut between the flashback of Jake's longing and beautiful face next to Jake 20 years later worn down by the weight of dashed dreams, wondering what could have been. This is one of those movies where you find that you fully appreciate both performances of the two men, Heath and Jake, equally, but perhaps one before the other over time. I was first blown away by Heath's performance, which seemed to eclipse Jake's performance - but over time, I've learned to truly appreciate what Gyllenhaal did here and how utterly perfect his portrayal really is.
The other performances in this movie are all first-rate, especially Michelle Williams who is the portrait of vulnerability in this movie. She deserves all the accolades she's received for this performance. Anne Hathaway did well too with very little screen time, but knocked it out of the park with the phone call scene at the end (incidentally, the only scene her character even had in the original short story.)
The movie should become both an American love story classic, as well as a gay classic. Glad to have someone of Ang Lee's talent take on a project like this. What an amazing man he is!