Ice Road: Vengeance

That title? Kind of dumb. The rest of the movie? Well, I wouldn’t say it’s smart, per se. It’s formulaic, not especially creative, lacks any really memorable moments…but that doesn’t mean it’s bad. The movie certainly accomplishes what it sets out to do, which is put Liam Neeson in yet another in an endless series of situations that require action action action. Neeson can do this stuff in his geriatric sleep by now, so there’s no problem with that. What’s encouraging and a bit charming about this flick is that Liam here gets to share the load; there’s ass-kicking aplenty for the locals to enjoy as well as the star's usual share of the fun and games. As action pics go, the attitude towards the foreign types shown here is almost enlightened. That, plus the battles, plus a few hair-raising moments on those crazy Himalayan mountain roads, plus some truly gorgeous scenery (maybe real, maybe matte or CGI) all add up to a decent time at the direct to home viewing. (The internet claims that this is actually a sequel to another movie that apparently has nothing to do with this storyline. No wonder the full tableau seems a bit weird.) Now if only someone had come up with a title that made a lick of sense. 

The Shootist

There are so many movies about old gunslingers that it seems like a contradiction: you wouldn’t expect that many tales of old gunslingers, because you figure not too many of them make it to be old, given the nature of their pursuits. Yet, here’s another one, featuring that oldest of old pistol packers, John Wayne, who is perfectly believable as a veteran of the range who is dying of cancer. (He would succumb to the disease in real life not long afterwards.) Lauren Bacall is a bit frosty as the widow who provides the outlaw with room and board and a bit of sympathy. Able support comes from another veteran of the genre, James Stewart, in a small but meaningful role as a doctor. Meanwhile, the real star of the film may be Harry Morgan, who is an absolute hoot as the local lawman who gives Wayne’s character a regular earful. The weak link here may be Ron Howard as the impressionable youth who takes a shine to the old gunslinger; let’s say it’s a good thing that directing worked out for him. This movie was late-period Western storytelling, both in when it came out (1976) and in setting (1901 in Carson City, well after the frontier had been officially closed). That gives the production an interesting feel, one that conveys a sense of change—of, indeed, things passing away—more so than what you get in the traditional oater full of horses, wide open spaces, and black and white morality. Nevertheless, the film still delivers its share of shootouts, old-time Americana, and the presence of one of the genre’s legends—still delivering the goods even at the end of the ride. As ways to go go, this one hits the target. 

Hero

China has always been a big country with a lot of people and resources. Why then has it not, until recently, been more dominant among the world’s nations? Well, if this movie is any indicator, it’s because every action there has to be so formal, so subject to rules and norms, so profoundly hierarchical, that to get anything done there has always required enormous effort and time and consideration. Watching this movie makes you feel that way, too. It takes a lot of effort to tease out the full arc of this story, which starts out straightforward and direct and shows signs of being entertaining and even clever…but that then descends into recursiveness, repetition and odd motivations. Some of the characters are assassins, then they don’t want to be. Some of them love each other, then they’re fighting each other. Some die, then they’re not dead. It also helps not that, due to frequent scenes where everyone is wearing the same outfit and has the same hairstyle, it can sometimes get difficult to tell characters apart. One character in particular, Broken Sword, flips his position back and forth so many times it’s hard to be sympathetic for him by the end. (He also seems to die in sword fights numerous times; better name for the character: Pin Cushion.) Beyond narrative unsteadiness, we also are subjected to numerous examples of the famous flying fighting that permeates these martial arts epics—which look just as silly here as they do in other entries in the genre. The style is reminiscent of fights in anime, which are also silly; one can accurately think of a film like this as live action anime. Perhaps the trope is no sillier than the magic depicted in western fantasy movies, but that does not necessarily recommend it, either. (Recall too the metaphysical expectations of the insurgents in the 1900 Boxer Rebellion for an example of how this form of fantasy meets with hard reality off the screen.) The movie does deserve props for its visual flair; many of the shots display an impressive artistic eye and interesting composition. Ultimately, though, the confusing nature of the story—muddled and tangled in motivations—drops the assessment of this flick down from solid action story to only modestly satisfying work. Also, one cannot pass this movie by without noting that the story’s clearest aspects show a deep sympathy with the idea of the unification of China by the first emperor over the liberty of the predecessor kingdoms—a theme that surely found approval with the leadership in Beijing. So, propaganda, even if a muddled sort of propaganda. I know fans of the genre love this kind of film, but for me, storming this castle just wasn’t that much fun. 

Sabrina

Some actors are actors, and others are movie stars. This movie features lead actors who were most emphatically movie stars. Longtime favorite Humphrey Bogart and more recent obsession Audrey Hepburn bring their legendary, luminous presences to this delightful story, which features a ton of charm and wit and just the right amount of romantic sentiment. William Holden—no slouch himself in the movie star department —provides terrific support here, while Billy Wilder brings his usual expertise to both the script and the director’s chair. Mostly though, this story shines because the two leads just bring something extra special to their roles. It’s the kind of thing that Hollywood used to deliver routinely—indeed that it was built upon—and it is ever so refreshing to turn back the clock and experience it once more. A movie that everyone can fall in love with—whether you live in the big house or over the garage. 

Beyond the Gaze: Jule Campbell's Swimsuit Issue

Some debates are, seemingly, doomed to go on without ultimate resolution. The question of female “objectification” versus “empowerment”—in both the general context and the specific context of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue—looks like one of those debates. This documentary makes some attempts at exploring the subject, with the usual nods to those who object to the various targets for criticism—the SI issue primary among them—as well as the standard declarations about agency and women in control and fighting against male domination…it all gets its piece of the action in this film. But given that the chief subject of the movie is the life and work of Jule Campbell, the woman primarily responsible for the iconic publication, you know going in which side of the debate the filmmakers are on, so you don’t expect to see anything that would convince you of the exploitation argument. Yet, the rationales presented by the empowerment side ring hollow and too self-contained here, as they always do. A complicating factor with this forum for the debate is that this movie is as much a biography of Campbell and her work as it is a history of the swimsuit issue’s concept and cultural impact. This means that there are many mitigating elements in the flow of the film’s narrative that focus much more on Campbell’s life arc, from working editor to elderly and fragile retiree, including many touching moments between her and her family, friends and the models she worked with, most of whom seem to have adored her. It’s hard to pass any significant judgments on larger issues when you wish to honor the personal story of such an individual. So there are few answers to be had here for any who wish to draw conclusions about the right and wrong of the issue (in multiple senses of that word). Personally, I grew up looking at the SI swimsuit issue, and I believe it is both an obvious bit of softcore and a perfectly reasonable part of the publishing industry. (Or it was before what one wag referred to as “the war on boners” started.) Puritanism is rarely an effective reaction to human animal realities, while babbling about how women feel about their presentation exclusive of the reactions to said presentation—as if it all happens in a vacuum where the titular male gaze never falls, or can be nullified by sheer will—is equally quixotic. Maybe, then, the personal thread in this doc is the true answer: just focus on an individual, or on all individuals, whatever their context, and perhaps you can and will do right by them. That would be a fine legacy for the now-departed Ms. Campbell (who passed in 2022), or for anyone else for that matter. Picture that, why not?

The Adventures of Prince Achmed

Well, it’s not every day that you get to watch a hundred-year-old movie. Nor does it happen that the film in question is as beguiling as Lotte Reiniger's silhouette stop-motion animation work. There are scenes in this movie that are so creatively expressed that the viewer is left wondering exactly how they were done—even in this time of digital filmmaking and realistically rendered visuals. It’s pure creativity and imagination that went into the making of this film, which tells a tale from the Arabian Nights that contains much that is familiar to most audiences—the famous story of Aladdin—blended into a second story about the titular character and his own world spanning deeds. It’s a lot of fun to watch and the story is not too difficult to follow despite the need for English sub subtitles of the German subtitles (in an otherwise wordless presentation. The current fashion is to be highly concerned with the last five minutes and to concurrently ignore everything that came before, but that is a dreadful mistake—a conclusion proved by looking at this postcard from the far ago. The light and magic here come not from a genie or a lamp, but from the continuum of human creativity and consciousness.

Funny Face

This movie starts from the preposterous notion that dressing Audrey Hepburn like an Albanian peasant somehow hides the fact that she is perfectly exquisite. Don’t worry—they get over their misapprehension soon enough. From there you get a healthy dose of Hepburn in all her usual glory—appearing glamorous, laying on the charm, and even singing and dancing in mock bohemian-beatnik style—not to mention plenty of Parisian beauty and joie de vivre. Plus you get to watch a delightful performance from Fred Astaire, who reminds the viewer that even this late in his game he still brought plenty of charm and dash to his role. Sure, the musical numbers are somewhat dated at this point, and I must admit my usual lack of enthusiasm for dance set pieces—but the film as a whole gives ample reason for one to enjoy its fun and clever humor and romance. Such simple pleasures may no longer be fashionable, but quality moviemaking is always in season.