Category Archives: 2026

Wildwood

Leave a reply

Wildwood                           3 stars

Wildwood is Laika Studio’s new animated fantasy film just released in theaters. Laika is known for their previous animated films Coraline and Kubo and the Two Strings. Wildwood is based on a Young Adult novel by Colin Meloy published in 2011. At the opening of the movie, we witness a young boy in an isolated mansion who is about to attempt to kill himself. He reveals that he is an automaton before throwing himself off a balcony to his death in view of his mother. Thus, we are assured that this is going to be something very dark. The animation style is stop-motion photography, made with very detailed puppets and background and is quite beautiful. The story is a kind of fairy tale involving a huge number of characters that takes place in a magical land. The story begins in a family’s home in Portland, Oregon, seemingly in the nineteen eighties. Prue is a teenage girl living there with her parents and baby brother, Mac. This version of Portland is surrounded by a magic forest known as the Impassable Wilderness with Prue’s parents warning her that she must never venture there, so right away we know something is up. When the parents need to leave the house one day, Prue is left to care for Mac and is told that the boy must never leave the house. So, naturally Prue takes him for a bike ride around the city like a teen girl would do. Unfortunately, little Mac gets kidnapped by a murder of crows and is taken to the previously mentioned forbidding forest. It is up to Prue and a teen boy, Curtis, to go searching for him in this forbidden land. Upon entering the forest, the two discover that the forest is inhabited by talking animals including a brigade of coyotes dressed in military uniforms. Here the pair are separated, and each has their own harrowing adventure in this magical, yet terrifying land. From here the story gets increasingly involved as it centers around a warrior queen bent on extending her power with no care as to who gets killed in the process. The adventure grows more complex as characters are added and secrets are revealed all culminating in a final battle scene of epic proportions. Prue’s bravery and devotion to her baby brother are put to the ultimate test. The animation is very elaborate and detailed, with plenty of action. Quite a few well-known actors lend their voices to the characters that I won’t go into here. I had to wonder about the choice of setting the filmmakers used. The magical forest seemed to be set in the late 1800’s, but they have modern inventions like automobiles at the same time as 18th century military uniforms, crossbows, artillery with cannonballs and catapults. And the warrior queen wears a suit of armor straight out of the Middle Ages. Some things seemed very out of place. I thought the movie was too dark and violent for younger viewers so I’m not sure who the best audience for the movie is. It’s worth seeing if you have nothing better available.

You Can See Everything

Leave a reply

You Can See Everything                 5 stars

In 2018 Elizabeth Holmes, the founder and CEO of the blood test startup Theranos, was convicted of defrauding investors over making false claims that their product could test for multiple diseases from a single drop of blood. Everyone can remember the fall of this seemingly brilliant entrepreneur who made the cover of Forbes magazine. Books, documentaries, podcasts and a mini-series have been made on the subject. Before her eleven-year prison sentence was to begin Holmes and her partner, Billy Evans, invited the film company A24 to document her story in an attempt to rehabilitate her image. Thus, the documentary You Can See Everything begins with director Nathan Fielder visiting them in a San Diego cottage on the beach 46 days before the incarceration is to begin. What follows over the next three hours is one of the most fascinating documentaries I can remember. The movie can be thought of in three parts. In the first, Fielder questions Holmes and Evans about their circumstances and why he was even chosen to begin with. (Fielder’s background is a comedian, certainly not someone with knowledge of medical devices.) We can see that he must tread very lightly with his questioning as he must maintain trust while at the same time seeking to get into the mind of his host. Holmes is eager to engage, but when the subject of the device and the defrauding is discussed, it is clear that she does not believe she did anything illegal or immoral. The claim about the device’s capabilities is just a matter of semantics, a misunderstanding. She believes the device actually works despite the evidence. Fielder takes one occasion to show her the famous Abbott and Costello Who’s On First? comedy routine to show her how words and phrases could mean different things to different people, but she doesn’t seem to get the reason why it is funny. Holmes and Evans even talk about starting a new Theranos again. They are committed to the cause. What? Throughout their talks, Fielder and Holmes seem to connect, but you’re not sure if either is faking it. Finally, the film crew follows her to the Texas prison where she will serve her sentence. The second part picks up after Holmes has been in prison for two years with the film crew visiting Billy Evans at their house in Texas. There they find him actively pursuing the couple’s business interests. He has regular visits with Holmes and has taken over her X account, creating messages as if he were her. Evans has become a control freak telling the director what he can and cannot talk about while filming. In the final part, Fielder takes us back to the impetus of the film. He brings Amanda Seyfried, the actress who portrayed Holmes in the mini-series The Dropout, into the movie discussing the unusual situation. Seyfried becomes a stand-in for recreations of scenes that happened when Fielder and the executives began talks about the film. There we see how controlling Billy was from the start, so we wonder: Is he manipulating Holmes through this entire endeavor? Just how much does Holmes know about Billy’s demands? The recreated scenes continue with Seyfried as Holmes when Fielder gets permission to visit Holmes in prison alone. The questions only expand in this final meeting. Who is Elizabeth Holmes? Is she a misunderstood victim, a master manipulator or pathological liar? What is the truth about her? The audience must be the judge. Psychologists will be studying this case for years. Nathan Fielder has created a masterpiece of a documentary. Look for it to get plenty of attention when the awards season starts.

Makikiraan Po (Let Us Through, Dear Ancestors)

Leave a reply

Makikiraan Po (Let Us Through, Dear Ancestors)                 3 stars

My last film at The Chicago International Film Festival was the anti-colonial drama Makikiraan Po (Let Us Through, Dear Ancestors), by Filipino director Lav Diaz. The movie is set in 1617 Philippines, when imperial Spain was colonizing the Philippines by using the church to convert the indigenous people. Diaz is praised by many critics, but I have to say this is not my style of movie. At three hours in length, it is apparently one of Diaz’s shorter movies. (He previously made a nine-hour long movie called Death in the Land of Encantos.) In the movie a Spanish priest named Padre Enciso is ruling the local natives and converting them from their pagan religion to Catholicism. The men are being forced to build his grand church in the jungle, which has led to the deaths of many of them. Enciso takes advantage of the resulting widows, convincing them to have sex with him. Thus, he has many offspring of mixed race. One of the men he has fathered is Dungwen who now has his own family. Enciso needs a shipment of marble to be moved to the village as part of his church construction project, so he forces Dungwen to be part of the crew that will make this journey. (Never mind, that Dungwen needs to care for his family.) He and the other men are assured that wealth and land will be theirs upon completion of the mission. So, the crew of native men sets off on the mission to move the marble through the jungle that is occupied by dangerous marauders. We hear more of Dungwen’s story during the journey. At the same time at the village, Enciso has the local medicine woman named Babayeng Indimatandog imprisoned for practicing the native pagan religion, though she has many followers. The drama plays out in both settings, ultimately leading to tragedy for most of those involved. The film is done entirely in black and white and uses a narrow aspect ratio that is close to a square picture. All the scenes are done as static shots, often with the actors placed at some distance from the cameras. There is plenty of dialogue, but the movie seemed to be ponderously slow to me. Although the story centers around the building of a church, the church itself never appears on screen. It is just discussed by the characters. At one point in the story there is a massacre of the natives, only none of that action appears on screen. The audience is left to deduce what happened by seeing the aftermath and discussion by the characters. My suspicion is that the film’s budget wouldn’t allow for such sets or scenes, but maybe there is another explanation. I found that this story of oppression of indigenous people by a colonial power and the resulting tragedy is gripping and needs to be told, but Diaz’s style is not something I could enjoy.

Head to Head

Leave a reply

Head to Head    4 stars

The first film I saw at The Chicago International Film Festival this week was the Iranian made Head to Head by Iranian filmmaker Ghahsideh Golmakani. In this absurdist comedy Golmakani makes a statement about the severe restrictions placed on women in Iranian culture dictating what is acceptable clothing and behavior in public. In the movie, a woman director, Behar is directing a movie being made without government approval, where the female roles are all played by men. Like the fictional movie in the story, Head to Head was made without the knowledge of the government. (It shares this feature with last year’s It Was Just an Accident.) The male actors must always wear head scarves and are told to behave like women. They must be careful how they sit, walk and must not dance when music is being played. There is a thriving cinema industry in Iran, but it is heavily monitored by the government and must not criticize the government in any way. Behar’s cameraman is not only filming the movie but is also secretly filming the actors behind the scenes. This was Behar can capture the reactions of the men to these strange circumstances, material that she intends to be part of the film. Much of the movie takes place on the road in the desert, after government police arrive unexpectedly and Behar, her cameraman and two actors escape in a van. There, the action continues as they argue over the circumstances and one actor refuses to continue with the project after removing his clothes. We find out that Behar has a history of being in prison over past violations. Behar’s frustration over the restrictions of Iranian culture only grows even when faced with the prospect of being caught by the morality police. Ultimately, we can see that not only women, but men also must pay the price of government control in this oppressive society. Unlike the other films of the festival, the director was not allowed to enter the United States to present her film.

I’ll Be Gone in June

Leave a reply

I’ll Be Gone in June          3 ½ stars

One more film showing at The Chicago International Film Festival was I’ll Be Gone in June from first time feature film director Katharina Rivilis. The film premiered at Cannes and is produced by Wim Wenders, the highly regarded German filmmaker known for The Buena Vista Social Club. The subject is that all too common character of American comedies, the visiting foreign exchange student. In this case we are not dealing with a comedy and the student is 17-year-old Franny (Naomi Cosma), from a small town in Germany. Franny was assigned to Las Cruces, New Mexico by lottery for a year and is paired with a highly religious, conservative foster family. She experiences culture shock with her host family who don’t approve of her more secular background. She disapproves of Franny speaking German to a fellow German student and of her revealing clothing. Inexplicably, the parents leave Franny and two other girls in the parking lot of a casino while they are inside gambling for hours. The story is complicated by the fact that it is set in 2001, with the terrorist attacks of 9/11 occurring near the outset of Franny’s stay. Thus, while the country is going through the shock of the attack, Franny feels even more like an outsider, experiencing the talk of revenge and seeing the increased security of check points. But she is here for a year and soon finds a good social group to hang out with. The movie wouldn’t be complete without a love interest, and this is provided by Elliot, a depressed musician who is suspected by some of being a drug user. The pair hang out occasionally and become close, but we can see the coming clash between someone with a bright future and another who will be sentenced to a life devoid of opportunity. There are many beautiful scenes featuring the mountainous and desert landscape of New Mexico. The camera work is quite good. The director draws on her own experiences as a German exchange student, being in New Mexico at the time of the 9/11 attacks. While engaging and thoughtful, there was a lot packed into the more than two hours of running time. The film could have easily been shorter without losing much value.

I Rarely Wake Up Dreaming

Leave a reply

I Rarely Wake Up Dreaming         4 stars

At this year’s Chicago International Film Festival, I took in a most unusual war time drama. German director Isabelle Stever’s I Rarely Wake Up Dreaming tells us the LGTBQ story of Olya and Oleh who are in a long-term transgender relationship. This story happens to be set during the opening months of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the suburbs of Kyiv. Not only does the young couple have to live in the shadow of war, but they also have to deal with the transphobia of their fellow countrymen. Ukrainian screenwriter Anna Melikova set out to write about what happens when one partner in a lesbian relationship decides to transition into a man. (In the movie it is Oleh who becomes a trans-man.) But then the invasion happened, so she decided to write these events into the screenplay. The couple and Olya’s parents find they must evacuate their home due to the threat of the invading Russian army at the same time that Olya is feeling resentment toward Oleh because she now must be in a heterosexual relationship. When the couple reaches the border and tries to flee the country to go to Germany, they are prevented from crossing since able bodied men may not leave and must serve in the military. As they ponder their situation things get worse when it is reported what the Russians did in their town of Bucha. The movie is one of only a handful of dramatic productions set in the tragedy of the Ukraine war. Plus, it makes viewers aware of the challenges of being LGBTQ in a culture unsympathetic to their issues. The movie is filmed in a very static fashion with still cameras and shots at indirect angles from the subjects, making it appear like we are peering into their world. Amazingly, the director who does not speak Ukrainian was able to pull off this feat. I recommend I Rarely Wake Up Dreaming especially if you haven’t seen a dramatic portrayal of transgender people before.

Mariinka

Leave a reply

Mariinka              4 ½ stars

For my first film of the 62nd Chicago International Film Festival, I saw the documentary Mariinka by Belgian director Pieter-Jan De Pue. You may think that we have seen enough on film about the Ukraine-Russia war which is now in its fifth year. This film takes a different approach that I found to be original and refreshing. De Pue went to Mariinka, a small city in Donetsk Oblast which is in the same region as Mariupol around 2013 with the idea of filming several young people living there over a period of several years. Of course, he had no idea that it would become a war zone that would impact millions of lives and that he would spend over ten years making his movie. His subjects include a family of four brothers living in an orphanage, a female paramedic/medical student and a woman smuggler. The filming started when they were still kids and all of them were orphans or from broken families, something quite common in Ukraine. He follows each of them into adulthood showing their involvement in the seemingly never-ending war of Russian aggression. Mariinka has been completely destroyed, and no one lives there anymore. Of the four brothers, one is in the Ukrainian army, one fights on the Russian side, one has been disabled from combat and the youngest was adopted by an American family living in Mississippi as a toddler. The film gets up close with them in actual combat situations with casualties. The paramedic is filmed as a high school student, training to be a boxer and at a program in the high school auditorium. Later during the war, she is visiting the same auditorium in its bombed-out state as well as visiting the grave site of her mother. The smuggler is filmed as she delivers goods to soldiers and others by riding through the war zone by bicycle. The film is both terrifying and peaceful. One senses the hopelessness that each of these young people must have. It is hard to imagine what the filmmakers had to endure to film these scenes. Each of the last three Documentary Academy Awards have gone to movies about the Ukraine war. These include 20 Days in Mariupol, No Other Land and Mr. Nobody Against Putin. Next year there may well be a fourth.

Verity

Verity    1 ½ stars

Verity is Latin for the word truth. It is also the title of the new psychological thriller by Michael Showalter (The Idea of You, The Eyes of Tammy Faye) based on the novel by Colleen Hoover. Truth can come in many forms, it may not be shared by different people, and it may be very hard to find. This is especially true in Verity. The movie stars Dakota Johnson as Lowen Ashleigh, a published yet not very successful fiction writer, Anne Hathaway (who is in about half of the new movies this year) as Verity Crawford, a highly successful writer of fiction and Josh Hartnett as Verity’s husband, Jeremy. Now, do you remember my advice of what to do if a billionaire invites you to their private mansion/island/compound? Apparently, the same applies if a famous writer invites you to their secluded house in the woods. At the outset of the movie, Lowen is walking to a meeting with a publisher when she happens to meet Jeremy at a street corner where she witnesses a bicyclist get killed by a passing car and she ends up covered in the cyclist’s blood. (What a way to introduce a character.) Sympathetic Jeremy helps her get cleaned up and lends her his shirt so she can still make it to her meeting. (Never mind how traumatized she must be.) When she asks him about his reaction to the tragedy, his response is “I’ve seen worse”. Who says that? But then, Jeremy shows up at her meeting as the one making the offer to Lowen for her to be a ghost writer for his wife, Verity to continue writing her wildly successful book series. After some convincing from her agent (Ismael Cruz Cordova), Lowen accepts, but first she must move into the couple’s isolated luxury home so she can research Verity’s materials on her books. Upon arrival she meets their son, Crew, who is about five and finds out that Verity is paralyzed and in a comatose state, requiring round-the-clock care. Lowen is told that this is the result of a recent car accident. (The creepiness expands.) Lowen continues with her mission, delving into Levity’s notes and books that show that Levity writes about some very dark stuff, always from the point of view of the villain. Things take a long time to get going, but eventually we find out that these are some really fucked up people that have an extremely twisted view of things. (One thing though, with this group of actors there is no shortage of steamy sex.) Without giving too much away, Lowen is drawn into a world of deceit that will consume her. The audience too, will become uncertain of what to believe as each layer of complexity is revealed. The more I thought about what I saw, the less I liked it. The actions of the characters are so convoluted and absurd you will leave thinking that no one could think like that. By the final reveal, I was thinking why did I come see this movie. The critics mostly panned it, but it was a box office success. The author, Colleen Hoover has had three other books made into movies: “It Ends with Us”, “Regretting You” and “Reminders of Him”. I have not seen any of them. The movies are described as dull by critics but have made billions of dollars. Now I know that I don’t need to see any of them.

Digger

Digger   3 ½ stars

Have you been wondering what Tom Cruise has been up to since his last two installments of Mission: Impossible? It’s not another stunt-filled action movie like we have been used to. We found out this past weekend with the release of Digger, directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu (Birdman and Biutiful), a political satire about a southern billionaire oilman who may be responsible for the end of human civilization. Cruise has left his usual action star routine and transformed himself into a bombastic bigger than life tycoon who lives in a mansion and wears silk pajamas and snakeskin boots. It’s hard to recognize him under the makeup and the fat suit, but he makes himself known through the most over the top performance we have seen from him. The movie starts with bubbles emerging from the ocean floor. Then we find Digger Rockwell (Cruise) in bed attending to his sick cat, which appears to be an animatronic creation and not the real thing. (This is a hint as what will come later.) When he gets an emergency telephone call from an employee and is visited by some of his technical experts, it becomes apparent that there has been an explosion at the company’s oil rig in Greenland that resulted from a giant crack in the earth’s surface and a massive methane release. A large chunk of the ice shelf has broken free and may be headed to the coast of northern Europe where it would cause the greatest environmental disaster in history. A meeting of the President of the United States (John Goodman in a performance that matches his Big Lebowski role in intensity) and his cabinet is called at Digger’s mansion where the problem is presented and possible responses are considered. In discussions resembling our current state of affairs, possible options range from military strikes to calling for a spiritual revival to absolving those responsible of guilt and blaming the Russians. Later, in the master set piece of the movie, the leaders of the world are gathered in a large amphitheater like room where Digger makes an over-the-top speech with plenty of stomping and yelling taking blame for the catastrophe but also making himself out to be the hero as he was just satisfying the world’s unquenchable appetite for cheap energy. There is nothing subtle about Iñárritu’s intent here. Through all the satire and insane scenes, he is saying that we are our own enemy. Though we want to blame a few powerful men, we really must blame ourselves. Besides the loud performances, the story probably won’t land with many audiences used to Tom Cruise’s more conventional action movies. And it hasn’t been well received with critics either. It doesn’t quite match the humor of Don’t Look Up, that other comedy about an environmental disaster. This was a swing for the fences attempt for the moviemakers and for Cruise. The production though is top notch. It is apparent there was a lot of money behind this effort. Other notable cast members are Riz Ahmed (Sound of Metal) as the scientist warning Digger about the disaster, Sandra Huller (Anatomy of a Fall), Digger’s sister, a scientist working on renewable energy, Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me By Your Name) as the US Vice-President and Jesse Plemons as a big tech billionaire. I can’t say what to expect when awards season comes, but it looks like a big swing and a miss. If you see it, watch for the big plot twist!

Shaun the Sheep: The Beast of Mossy Bottom

Shaun the Sheep: The Beast of Mossy Bottom     5 stars

With the release of Shaun the Sheep: The Beast of Mossy Bottom, from the very British Aardman Animations, directed by Steve Cox and Matthew Walker, we can officially say that it is not too early for Halloween themed movies. Believe it or not, this is only the third in the series of full-length animated movies that stars the mischievous sheep, Shaun and the flock of adventurous sheep who cause no end of havoc on the Soggy Bottom farm and surroundings. The previous outing was way back in 2019 with A Shaun the Sheep Movie: Farmageddon. These movies are done using puppets and elaborate sets that are photographed in a painstaking process of stop motion animation that takes years to produce. This time around it is harvest season and the sheep are preparing for Halloween having planted their own patch of pumpkins. (Yes, Sheep like Halloween too.) Unfortunately, through a series of pratfalls by Farmer John and interference by a clothesline eating goat, the pumpkins are destroyed, thus denying the sheep their chance to create jack-o-lanterns. (Notice that the Halloween tradition has crossed the Atlantic and entered British culture.) But there is an answer to their misfortune. Creative genius Shaun has a book titled Home-Made Science and endeavors to use the formulas there to create a growing chemical in a very elaborate lab in the farm’s windmill that will allow new pumpkins to grow overnight! The problem is that farmer John has found the chemical and applies it to his balding head, thinking it will give him renewed vitality and allow him to attract the attention of a female veterinarian who lives in town. Only, Shaun’s chemical works too well causing the pumpkins to grow to immense size and the farmer’s hair to quickly grow and completely cover his head and body with orange hair! Thus, the Beast of Mossy Bottom terrorizes the town while Farmer John appears to go missing. So, all sorts of troubles befall the inhabitants leading to hilarious stunts with the sheep and Bitzer, the farm dog, as they attempt to deal with the new threat. It’s all fun that almost any audience will love. And at only one hour and twenty minutes in length it should not wear out on the youngest viewers. There are a few references that only adults will get, including similarities to the Frankenstein movies and Psycho. Shaun’s mad scientist costume, the elaborate Rube-Goldberg style lab that Shaun creates and the vengeful townsfolk are especially amusing. In the film genre of purely visual sight gags, nothing tops what Aardman Animations can dish out. I hope that Shaun the Sheep will brighten more of our days with slap-stick antics.