ROUND UP OF NEW AND RECENT FILMS PART NINE

ROUND UP OF NEW AND RECENT FILMS PART NINE.

Hipsters (Stilyagi/2008) is a Russian musical set in Moscow in 1955. Mels (Anton Shagin) belongs to the Communist Youth League, which tracks down young people -- or "hipsters" -- who love the traitorous Western ideology, including American fashion and music. Mels falls for a hipster named Polina or Polly (Oksana Akinshina) and becomes a hipster himself (although his hairstyle looks more modern-day rockabilly -- almost like Eraserhead -- than 1950's greaser). The colorful settings and cinematography, enthusiastic cast. snappy songs (most original, although we also hear "Summertime" from Porgy and Bess), and lively dancing don't quite disguise the fact that this love story is cliched and superficial. However, the picture is good to look at and at times quite entertaining, if definitely overlong. **1/2.  

Big Eyes (2014) is Tim Burton's true story about the painter Margaret Keane (Amy Adams) whose husband Walter (Christoph Waltz) took credit for her work, culminating in a court trial. Whatever you may think of Keane's paintings of her big-eyed subjects, Big Eyes is absorbing and well-acted, one of Burton's better movies in recent years (if not exactly spectacular). Terence Stamp is also in the cast. Waltz is a good actor who almost always adds a layer of slime to his portrayals. ***. 

Dark Crimes (2016) stars Jim Carrey (pictured) as a Polish police officer (!) trying to get out of desk detail before retiring. Carrey gives a good dramatic performance and has some very strong moments, and the supporting cast is generally on target as well, but even if you accept that Carrey's character is a fuck-up, some of his actions are inexplicable. Moody photography helps a lot but this script has a whole lot of problems. Marton Csokas certainly scores as the sinister author that Carrey is certain is responsible for a brutal murder, and Charlotte Gainsbourg is fine as his girlfriend. Some of the action centers on a shuttered, sleazy sex club called the Cage. Supposedly based on a true story, this is initially compelling but ultimately a misfire. **3/4. 

Sam Claflin and Rachel Weisz

My Cousin Rachel (2017) is a creditable remake of the earlier version of Daphne Du Maurier's novel starring Olivia De Havilland and Richard Burton. This version stars Rachel Weisz and Sam Claflin and is written and directed by Roger Michell. The film is very well photographed by Mike Eley. The story retains its ambiguity.  ***. 

Who's Killing the Cheerleaders? (aka Who is Killing the Cheerleaders?) is a 2020 telefilm in which a young lady who was a high school student when some of her friends were murdered comes back to town as a teacher -- and now more cheerleaders are being killed. This is a bloodless, non-slasher slasher film that may hold the attention for a time but which flies from your memory practically before it's even over. Ella Cannon is acceptable as the heroine, as is Austin Freeman as her old wannabee boyfriend. It all seems to take place in some alternate universe, the cable land of crappy movies. From Lifetime, naturally. **.  

STUPID RECENT MOVIE: THE FAVOURITE

Emma Stone as Abigail Hill

THE FAVOURITE (2018). Director: Yorgos Lanthimos.

Queen Anne (Olivia Colman) supposedly rules England but most of her decisions of state are made by her confidante and lover, Lady Sarah Churchill (Rachel Weisz). Into this household comes Sarah's cousin, Abigail (Emma Stone of La La Land), who once was a lady herself, but thanks to her now-dead alcoholic father, has become a mere servant subject to Sarah's patronizing attitude. But Abigail has her own ambitions, and manages to draw the attention and favor of the queen, eventually replacing Sarah in Anne's bed. But Sarah is not about to take that, uh, lying down, and Abigail may have to take drastic steps to remain "The Favourite."

Olivia Coleman as the queen 

The Favourite takes actual historical characters, uses some of the bare facts of their inter-relationships, then pretty much invents everything else -- The Favourite is the very epitome of "dramatic license." Thrown out of the queen's favor, Sarah did intimate that there might have been a sexual relationship between Anne and Abigail, and presented a very negative portrait of  the queen in her memoirs. However, later biographers, who were much more objective, say that Anne was not the dunderhead she was portrayed as in both the memoirs and this movie. While there is no doubt that history has often been subjected to LGBT erasure, there is no real substantiation that a lesbian love triangle existed in the palace in the first place (Anne's husband, Prince George, is never even mentioned let alone depicted, not that would necessarily have meant that she was strictly heterosexual.) But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

Rachel Weisz as Sarah Churchill

Not that The Favourite necessarily has a good story. Everything is presented in very contemporary terms, vulgarized and dumbed-down, as if the film were a campy black comedy. The acting is professional but not especially memorable (even if Colman managed to net a Best Actress Oscar). The movie seems directed at a young, immature audience who wants their slice of history with lots of sex and a liberal sprinkling of "f" and "c--t" words. Because of the lesbian interplay, I'm also afraid some viewers will see this as some sort of progressive LGBT movie when it is anything but. While I'm not saying the film is homophobic as such, it's hard not to notice that the gay or bisexual ladies in it are pretty much presented as grotesque and not at all sympathetic. The director did not want to really deal with the sexuality of the characters or their attitude towards same, but then the characters are fairly one-dimensional to begin with. (Let me make it clear that I completely disassociate myself from viewers who hated the film simply because it presented LGBT characters.)

Queen Anne's court

Incredibly, The Favourite garnered Oscars and nominations and dozens and dozens of awards (GLAAD even nominated it as "Best Picture," although it didn't win.) What on earth has happened to people's critical faculties these days? The only award the film really deserved was for the cinematography by Robbie Ryan. As with the equally over-rated Moonlight or Call Me By Your Name this is an example of the Academy and Hollywood in general being overly impressed with a film because it is seen as progressive when it really isn't. The historical inaccuracies alone are enough to make this a sham of a production, and I can only imagine that poor Queen Anne, gay or not, is spinning in her grave.

Verdict: This is hardly history -- or herstory. **.