The Last Film You Watched

I saw Saltburn tonight and quite liked it, I would say it's a bit WTF at times but I did love the performances and Emerald Fennell has a great taste in music.

Uplifting seems to be thin on the ground at the moment showgirl. We went to see the documentary The Mission this afternoon about the young evangelical missionary who decided to go and spread the word among an isolated island tribe with catastrophic results. It's fascinating but certainly not uplifting. My 22 year old daughter went to see Saltburn this afternoon and described it as a one star movie. And on paper it looked like she was the target audience. Roll on Fallen Leaves!

A Forgotten Man ***

A "documented fiction" concerning the Swiss ambassador to Berlin during World War II returning home after Germany's defeat, is used as a dramatic device to argue that Switzerland's neutrality may have been largely a myth. The history is interesting, the acting good, but the narrative does not work. The diplomat is haunted in his conscience by a character it seems he may not actually have met, and some of the dialogue lacks credibility. If you can accept that events are symbolic rather than real, maybe you can get more out of this than I could.

Saltburn *****

Going in, I had no idea what kind of film to expect, other than that, with Reese Shearsmith in a cameo, it was likely to be dark. Would it be horror? Psychological thriller? Character-based drama? I had not a clue. Afterwards, I think it's fair to say that Saltburn largely carves it's own hybrid path genre-wise, and it's a fantastic, stylised ride that held me mesmerised throughout by the 1.33 aspect ratio image (close enough I guess to the 1.37 academy ratio of classic Hollywood fare before widescreen).

Barry Keoghan is superb as Ollie, a modern-day, working-class antihero, with a convincing Scouse accent. At his Oxford college, and enamoured of charismatic and hedonistic fellow student Felix, Ollie accepts an offer to spend the summer vacation with Felix at his stately home, Saltburn. Felix's family of aristocratic eccentrics -- all played pitch-perfectly with a hint of the grotesque by a marvellous ensemble cast -- serve to demonstrate that guests are only ever welcomed as such and can never ever become part of their club. The socialist allegory is not subtle, but is key to allowing viewers to align their sympathies with Ollie during subequent proceedings.

In fact, the key themes of the narrative resonated greatly for me. Coming from a blue-collar background and a state comprehensive to an Oxford college just across from the one featured here, I am all to aware of that feeling, when mingling with those of vast inherited wealth, that one's face does not quite fit despite the charming smiles. Writer/director Emerald Fennell has taken that deep unease, that resentment at the inequitable distribution of wealth and status, and played out a fantasy that will appal some and delight others.

While there is some borrowing from past stories, the most obvious being Brideshead Revisited, it would be unfair to criticise Saltburn as derivative, as it combines ideas, new and old, in quite an original way and with an intoxicating sexual atmosphere and quite a cinematic flourish, helped by a great soundtrack. I loved it.

I did like the film but I do think Barry Keoghan's casting as Oliver . Loved the ending though,

Carey Mulligan as Pamela was a hoot, wish she had more screen time.

Agree regarding the score!  It was like some melodramatic soap opera and felt very cheap.  Completely took away the tension in my opinion.  

As I posted in the LFF thread, May December was my favourite film of the festival and it's since become my favourite film of the year. I haven't had the chance to see it again in cinemas because it's only got a very limited release and I can't find the time to make my way to central London to see it. Nevertheless, I thought I'd offer an alternative view from the people who didn't like it/were more mixed on it.

First of all, I love the score. It's hilarious and like a 4th central character. It punctuates moments of banal, suburban problems (like running out of hot dogs at a barbecue) as if they're the most devastating and tense tragedies in the world. It brings out the melodrama and reflects the type of tawdry TV movies that are often made about these sorts of scandals, but here it's being used in a tongue in cheek way (although at times as the film goes on its used mor win earnest).

I also disagree with the above poster that the film is a dissection of the morality of relationships where the man is underaged but more experienced than his of age female counterpart. That seems to me to be giving the woman - a child rapist - far too much credit in her justifications for her crime. Perhaps it's just a poor choice of wording or you're trying to avoid spoilers but the film to me is clearly a dissection of the stories we create to justify our choices, even if those choices are indefensible. Gracie, the groomer in this story, has developed a helpless, naïve, hyper-feminine persona which she uses to manipulate Joe and justify their relationship not only to others but to herself - she was the damsel in distress, the princess in the tower and he was her knight in shining armour, he just happened to be 13 years old is all.

Of course none of that is true (if you can say that definitively I guess, so much of the film is about the unknowability of truth and the inner lives of others), Joe - the boy Gracie groomed who is now her 36 year old husband about to be an empty nester - could never have been prepared for a relationship like that with Gracie. To suggest otherwise is to vastly overestimate the emotional and sexual maturity of a 13 year old to a worrying/dangerous degree. And I also found his coming to terms with what happened to him realistic considering he clearly was already conflicted about the whole situation (he was flirting with another woman online) and the scenario reflects the real life case which was one of the major inspirations for the film, Mary Kay Letourneau.

That's barely scratching the surface of the layers upon layers this film is operating under - I've barely touched on Natalie Portman's character, the brilliant performances or the gorgeous direction and cinematography - but i wont go on any further or else we'd be here all day.

Yeah dunno where the idea that Joe did all the seduction comes from, that's clearly Gracie's justification and projection in the movie. Gracie herself reveals so, when she switches from describing herself as "very naïf" to "very secure"

Dream Scenario *****

Hmmm. How to say something without giving away the plot? Let's try this...

Suppose you're an everyman who no-one notices. Someone who is boringly ordinary and doesn't stand out. Just part of the herd, perfectly amiable, but always risk-avoiding. It's a survival strategy many adopt in life.

But you feel completely alien from today's fast-paced, social-media influenced and dominated world that is driven by global marketing, obsessed with the superficial. Perhaps, coming to the twilight of your career, you had real talent that was never properly recognised, you saw others get credit that you deserved, you had serious ambition unfulfilled, and you're too trapped and scared to do or say anything about it.

Now imagine you fall deep asleep and experience one long nightmare in which all your anxieties manifest themselves. This film is that nightmare, and it's bonkers and ingenious and has plenty to say about modern life and relationships.  I defy anyone of middle age not to find some resonance with the themes.  There's also a deliciously dark comic mood with several LOL moments.

Nicolas Cage as the unlikely protagonist is utterly perfect, as is Julianne Nicholson as the wife whose patience is tested. As with last year's The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, fans hoping for Cage's usual action-man fare will be disappointed. As he approaches 60, Cage is re-positioning himself as a far more thoughtful actor who knows his limits and is choosing (some) roles that showcase what he is capable of, and it's suprisingly more than you'd expect.

I was not familiar with the work of Norwegian writer/director Kristoffer Borgli, but on the evidence here, I shall be keen to see more.

It seems so!

I don't know if you're old enough to remember Films Illustrated magazine from the 80s? That was great for showing ratings for each month's films from multiple critics, and the division of opinion could be stark.

I don't, but that was after my time & I do sometimes check a reviews round-up on websites, though my focus for reviews is always theatre, as somehow I seem more able to make up my mind about plays/shows, ie without needing a digest.  I do however remember, as a 6th-former, poring over a lot of publications in our school library (back in the days when school libraries could afford subscriptions); there were at least 2 monthly magazines for films.  I always suspected that it was teachers who had chosen these magazines for their own benefit & as far as I knew, I was the only pupil who ever read them.  One I think was Sight & Sound.