Change Your Image
alexander-e-bloch
Reviews
Ripley (2024)
When a persistent determination to emulate goes a bit too far
Earlier today I finished watching an eight-episode series Ripley (Netflix, 2024). Did it in just two sittings. All eight hours of it. A testament to one of two things: (1) an engrossing storyline; or (2) I don't get out much. In fairness, it's probably a bit of both.
On a personal note, all three screen adaptations of the 1955 crime thriller novel by Patricia Highsmith, The Talented Mr. Ripley, involved the actors I simply adore; hence my interest in the piece:
1. Plein soleil (Purple Moon), filmed in 1960, starring Alain Delon (his big-screen debut);
2. The Talented Mr. Ripley, released in 1999, starring Jude Law alongside Matt Damon; and
3. Ripley, dropped by Netflix several days ago, starring Dakota Fanning in what seems like her first adult role (although she was more impactful as a child actor).
In all three "incarnations" the set-up is quite similar. The victim - Dickie - a rich 20-something American expat has lost any zest for life and is trying to rediscover himself by getting immersed in the Italian culture, painting, architecture, language, etc., as stimuli of sorts. The villain - Tom - does not come from money and clearly does not belong in Dickie's circles. But his persistence, cunning, and staunch desire to attain this craved class transition make him more of a protagonist, rather than the villain.
The 2024 version was filmed entirely in Italy (including Naples, Rome, Palermo, San Remo, and Venice) and features some of the greatest songs of the era, including the classic Il Cielo In Una Stanza by Mina (when in a couple of hundred years they introduce a university course on the anthology of European 20th-century pop ballads, this would be the reference song. It would also appear that the producers working on this recording had just discovered the reverb effect and clearly went to town with it. But the song is still lovely).
8 out of 10 (9, if you like Caravaggio; 9.5, if you like both Caravaggio and Mina).
Poor Things (2023)
Frankenstein usurped by Don Juan; both overpowered by Look Who's Talking
Just came out of a movie theater after seeing Poor Things (Emma Stone, Mark Rufolo, Willem Dafoe). A weirdly fascinating composition of Dr. Frankenstein meeting a contemporary Figaro/Don Juan, all of whom are engrossed in Look Who's Talking (although Bulgakov's motif is unmistakably present).
Will not spoil the storyline, but the set-up alone is a great hook: a young woman decides to end her life during the ninth month of her pregnancy by jumping off London's Tower Bridge. The woman's cadaver ends up in the hands of a doctor whose only option in reviving the woman is to transplant the brain of her unborn daughter onto her. In other words, the movie begins featuring a grown woman with the cognitive level of a newborn, going through a painfully lingering cycle of enduring physical, emotional, and intellectual development. To characterize this plot as original (not to mention the execution effectiveness) would be a gross understatement.
As indicated earlier, it would be a disservice to reveal the plot. The opportunity to watch the entire film, unencumbered by foreshadowed plot twists, is truly worthwhile. What may be shared, however, are some of the random thoughts that unwittingly enter one's mind (pun intended) as the plot develops. One such thought is this: theological teachings instruct us that we are all created in G-d's image, imbued with powers of free will (i.e., the innate divine spark at risk of being extinguished by the choices we elect to make as we go through life). But our entire development phase (from the age of zero to say twenty - when we are launched into the polite society so to speak), is a wrestling match between our nature (i.e., feelings, instincts, fears, desires, temptations, tendencies, peer pressure, etc.) and the rational choices of doing the right/responsible thing, however difficult these choices appear to be.
Since Bulgakov was mentioned earlier, it may be appropriate to draw a parallel with the animal kingdom. When, for example, the mare foals, the baby horse is up on its feet within 20 minutes and well on its way toward independence, with the ability and freedom to follow its instincts, feelings, and desires. 20 minutes vs. 20 years! The bulk of these 20 years is seemingly devoted to learning how to resist the natural instincts to follow one's heart and learn to do the right thing. Watching Emma Stone's character "squeezing" the prescribed 20 years into a far more manageable window was quite a treat. Highly recommended!
Gisaengchung (2019)
Cinematic marvel
Four highly coveted Oscars (including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay), being awarded to a foreign-language film, is an unprecedented event in my memory. This makes Parasite (South Korean 2019 tragicomedy) a must-see movie. Having just come out of the theatre, I can admit in all sincerity that the film has affected me on multiple levels. But before broaching the poignant essentials, should firstly dispense with the banal, which I expect the woke and self-righteous movie-goers are likely to focus on. These will undoubtedly include such predictable clichés as injustices of income inequality, disdain of the chauffeur-driven elite towards "smelly" subway riders, aloof callousness to the upper classes, etc. These elements are undeniably featured in the film, but purely as a foil for a deeper exploration of the human psyche, which deserves to be examined with some specificity. Viewer warning: Parasite, while a monumental piece of cinematic work, is not a joyous viewing experience. The unrelenting intensity, unleashed on the viewer almost from the start (not too dissimilar to that of observing a circus acrobat on a tight rope without the safety net), is sustained without respite throughout the two-hour-plus duration. Armed with only a cursory knowledge of the South Korean society, culture, and class hierarchy, I felt somewhat disadvantaged, particularly during the early scenes. At the risk of being exceedingly presumptuous, I fear that most of the US movie-going public might be in the same boat, despite the prominence of the ubiquitous Samsung, KIA Motors and other Korean brands permeating global markets. If not for the omnipresent media denunciations of its dangerously unpredictable neighbor to the north, we would probably know even less about the Region. While ignorance is generally considered to be a bliss, in the case of Parasite, not knowing the Korean societal dynamics, one can't help but experience the frustrations of cognitive dissonance right from the start. On the one hand, we are presented with:
- a close-knit Kim family, exhibiting an unmistakably cooperative and mutually supportive spirit;
- healthy, good-looking, clever and articulate offsprings;
- athletically accomplished mother (the inference is drawn from a prominently placed photo, displaying her hammer throwing prowess in what appears to be a serious track & field event).
- all seemingly underemployed (e.g., relegated to pizza box assembly as an income source);
- underpaid (e.g., mooching off the neighbors for WIFI signal);
- under-housed (i.e., shabby, vermin-infested, basement-level dwelling, where drunken public urination in front of their window is a near-regular occurrence).