Inside the Circle

Inside the Circle; romantic comedy, USA, 2021; D: Javier Colon Rios, S: Stefy Garcia, Omar Mora, Justin Lee, Valeria Gonzalez  

Rocio is a woman working as a lawyer, trying to find the love of her life. She meets Giancarlo, a comicbook fan who designs apps. Even though their first encounter is clumsy, Rocio agrees to meet him again and go on a date. He even tells her about a circle he is doing on the floor, using toilet paper, wherein the person standing inside has to tell the truth. The two fall in love and become a couple, but their different worldviews start to burden their relationship. They break up. Two years later Rocio is about to get married to a different man, but suddenly changes her mind. Two years later, she is seen with Giancarlo and their kid together.  

“Inside the Circle” is “Annie Hall”-light, a bitter-sweet grown up romantic comedy about the trials and tribulations of a couple, though it is far less stylistically playful or innovative as the former. Some of its best bits arrive in the first half, when the story is both funny and brutally honest: the first meeting between Rocio and Giancarlo at a party, for instance, isn’t as ideal as most romantic comedies would put it, since Giancarlo returns back to the sitting Rocio and whispers to her in Spanish that her pants ripped on the front, a hole revealing her red shirt underneath. He just tried to warn her, but she takes it as an insult. Still, Giancarlo is such a different type on a personality that Rocio cannot resist but to go on a date with him. During a walk, he reveals his peculiar philosophy: “If I date because I need to date, I feel like I’m wasting my time. If I’m not doing it, I do other things that I love.” Rocio wonders what would happen if he stays alone during old age, and he even has an answer to that: “It means I did what I loved with the time I’ve had.” Later on, he even admits his ideal relationship would be four days with the person he loves, and the rest of the week free time off for himself. The movie thus explores people adapting to each other to try to change and do what is best for both, not just for the one. Occasionally, the movie is fun while toying with some ideas, such as presenting each chapter as a printed text somewhere, as it appears on a blackboard, a parking ticket or even on the screen of a mobile phone. Unfortunately, the main actress, Stefy Garcia, is a much better actor than her counterpart, Omar Mora. Likewise, after 50 minutes, the film runs out of steam and inspiration, and we are left with dry, standard dialogue and a soap opera-like relationship drama for the next half an hour, up until the very refreshing and tantalizing ending. The leitmotif of a circle, including a painting of it in Rocio’s room, symbolizes the full circle the couple undergoes (even in the form of a ring). The movie has its moments, and yet one just wishes it had more of them, and on a higher level.  

Grade:++

The House of Yes

The House of Yes; black comedy, USA, 1997; D: Mark Waters, S: Parker Posey, Josh Hamilton, Tori Spelling, Freddie Prinze Jr., Geneviève Bujold  

During a hurricane, Marty arrives with his fiancèe Lesly to Virginia to introduce her to his bizarre family: his brother Anthony; eccentric mother; and mentally unstable twin sister Jackie-O, who is obsessed with Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Jackie-O is puzzlingly jealous of Lesly, until Anthony finds out Jackie-O had incest with Marty, who she still loves. Anthony reveals that secret to Lesly, who has sex with him as revenge, but then regrets it. Yet Marty also had sex with Jackie-O that night. Unwilling to let him go, Jackie-O shoots Marty, while Lesly flees from the house in panic.  

“The House of Yes” is an unusual black comedy which, although shaky in the finale, still announced the future shrill side of the debut director Mark Waters (“Freaky Friday”, “Mean Girls”). Some parts in the film are brilliant, mostly in some deliciously snappy dialogues which at times almost reach the level of E. Lubitsch or P. Chayefsky (“One day I woke up stupid”. - “What’d you do?” - “I went back to bed.” - “That was wise”; “Pennsylvania is just this state that’s in your way when you’re trying to get someplace else.”), and there is even one touching little line by Marty, who says he saw Jackie-O apply make-up, and then just wash it away in tears, at which point he knew he had to go to New York. Underrated actress Parker Posey is excellent as the feisty Jackie-O and steals the show with her sharp antics, whereas a couple of moments even have some higher directorial touch, such as the hilarious moment where, inside the house, Jackie-O has invested a lot of energy to make her own hair look good, but someone opens the door and the breeze just “blows out” her hairdo into a mess. However, the film has two problems. Firstly, what does the title even mean? It is never truly explained and thus remains confusing. Secondly, the whole subplot of Jackie-O being obsessed with Jacqueline Onassis leads nowhere and feels like an intruder, and should have thus been simply removed from the film. It distracts from the main theme of this incest satire. The movie even starts off with archive footage of Mrs. Onassis interwoven with Jackie-O dressed into the former’s pink dress, and the viewers always wonder where the movie is going with this, but unfortunately, it seems it itself doesn’t know, since it plays no role (Jackie-O is already sufficiently depicted as mentally unstable without this masquerade) which makes the confusing ending feel incomplete and arbitrary. “The House of Yes” needed some polish, but you still enjoy in its spicy-macabre dish, and cannot say “no” to it.  

Grade:++

Armed and Dangerous

Armed and Dangerous; comedy, USA, 1986; D: Mark L. Lester, S: John Candy, Eugene Levy, Meg Ryan, Robert Loggia, Kenneth McMillan, James Tolkan

After he was framed for stealing, police officer Frank loses his job and thus decides to eductate himself to work as a security guard. He becomes friends with the ex-lawyer Norman, who in turn falls in love with supervisor Maggie, the daughter of Cpt. O'Connell. After a robbery of a warehouse, Norman poses as a tricky question; where does the 4 million $ union money go to? It turns out that union president Carlino wants to take the union money by having his men steal the van during the route, use it to finance Colombian drugs, and collect the insurance money. For that purpose, union treasury Lou is shot, and Frank and Norman are framed for his murder. However, Frank and Norman foil the kidnapping of the money van, get rehabilitated, whereas Carlino is arrested.

Canadian comedians Eugene Levy and John Candy starred in seven movies together, but ''Armed and Dangerous'' is often considered one of their weakest efforts, a tiresome, underwhelming comedy. The entire movie looks like anyone could have written it, even a 12-year old based on some simplistic jokes, since the screenwriters (among them even Harold Ramis) seem to have saved their better gags for some other movie. It is puzzling as to how little humor it has, how little it has to offer, and how little inspiration it has to even warrant doing this story in the first place. The opening sequence starts off sympathetically—the main protagonist, cop Frank, climbs up a tall tree to save a cat on top, but once there, realizes he is afraid to climb down, so a fireman truck is called for help, while Frank just tells them to hurry, ''because the cat is scared''—but the viewers will soon be disappointed to find out it is practically the only good joke in the entire film. Too many ideas lead nowhere, are too banal or in a cheap shot, such as the sequence where Frank and Norman hide inside an aerobic class, lie down and watch women's behinds in front of them, or when they disguise themselves as a gay couple—Frank as a transvestite, Norman as a man in a leather costume, which has two holes behind revealing Levy's butt-cheeks. The obligatory car stunt sequence at the end is there to try to save the movie, but the viewers have by that time already wasted their time. Unfortunately, one cannot escape the overall impression of ''Armed and Dangerous'': it is running on empty. 

Grade:+

Beauty, Brains, and Personality

Beauty, Brains, and Personality / Girls' Night In; comedy, USA, 2021; D: Emmett Loverde, S: Alexis Phillips, Tiana Tuttle, Samantha Skelton, Samantha Elizabeth Johnson

A girl is narrating a tale about three women: Jessica, Lynette and Candace are best friends. Jessica is considered attractive and popular with men, but is kind of dimwitted; Lynette is the intelligent one, but lonely, as she has been single for three years now; Candance has a positive personality. One evening, Jessica proclaims that she is the "beauty", while Lynette is the "brains" and Candance the "personality" of them three. Angry about these remarks, Lynette and Candance break contact with Jessica. However, they each decide to prove they are more than said labels: Jessica applies for a job as a secretary; Lynette applies to pose nude as a supermodel; while Candance decides to undergo artificial insemination and raise a baby by herself. The three make up. The girl narrator is revealed to be Candance's baby, Maddie, as she welcomes the three for a visit.

"Beauty, Brains, and Personality", alternatively also known as "Girls' Night In", is a solid, but surprisingly inconsequential film built solely on one wrong remark said by one of the three female protagonists. Despite a very good cast of the three, played well by Alexis Phillips, Tiana Tuttle and Samantha Skelton, the thin story is always a notch below their talent, never truly igniting or inspiring them to do anything more than just to be 'meagre cute'. There is no real story per se, it is more of a 'slice-of-life' film about these three characters interacting, but their dialogue is just so bland, negligible, trivial and unimportant. It is unusual how such three attractive women can be so boring in a movie. The jokes are simply not funny. They play out like a sitcom with only a handful of good moments. In the opening act, Jessica is introduced as the attractive-dumb one, lamenting about how she is worried about her skin, causing an exchange with Lynette: "Goop dries out my skin. If I have a dry skin, I'll look old. I'm not gonna go out looking old!" - "People do it all the time". Jessica also wants to borrow Lynette's apartment for her date, because Lynette's apartment "looks smart". How can an apartment look "smart"? By the appearance in the movie, one does not get the impression of it. Already this beginning shows the rather scanty foundations of the film. 

The main tangle is a bit of a stretch: one could in theory accept that Jessica would proclaim that she is the "beauty" of the group (though, ironically, she is actually the least attractive woman of the three), and that Lynette is the "brains", but what does she mean when she labels Candance as the "personality" of the group? What personality? Feisty, cynical, introverted, emotional, determined...? It is unclear. Yes, she is described as someone with a sunshine smile, but what does that have to do with a personality? Moreover, why wouldn't someone with a brain have a personality? Ultimately, while one could accept that someone could be categorized as either "brain" or "beauty", the "personality" label is an intruder since it is rather vague. The three women then go out to try to prove they are more than just these labels. Lynette, the "brain", decides to try out to be a supermodel, to prove she can also be the "beauty", which makes sense. Jessica, the "beauty", decides to find a job in a high profile company, to prove she can also be the "brains". Also makes sense. But Candance's path makes no sense. She wants to become pregnant and raise the baby all by herself. Why? What does that have to do with having something more than the (vague) notion of "personality"? She is the weak link. At least there is a funny scene at the sperm bank, where Candance can't make up her mind about which of the men on the photos she wants to pick to become pregnant, so she asks the doctor: "Can I get two donors and mix them up in the test tube?" Another good comical moment with a point is when the viewers hear Jessica's answering machine: "If you are male, and you're cute, and you are looking for Jesse, you maybe in luck." Unfortunately, the rest of events are just too thin to carry the film, and thus, despite a sweet reveal of the identity of the narrator at the end, the movie rarely engages. 

Grade:+

Instant Karma

Instant Karma; fantasy drama, USA, 2021; D: Mitesh Kumar Patel, S: Stew Jetson, Samantha Belle, Nancy Mercurio, Karl Haas, Ac Larkin, Keegan Luther

Just as Jeff finally finds a job as a driver for U-Lift, his car breaks down, and he is helped by a homeless man, Harry, to push it away from the street. The next day, Jeff's girlfriend Samantha informs Jeff that her friend left for a visit to India, and thus left his car to her, so she gives it to Jeff so that he can drive again. As a reward, Jeff gives Harry a couple of dollars. Later, Jeff is surprised when he finds ten times more dollars in the back of his new car. Some time later, when meeting him again on the street, Jeff gives Harry some food. Later, Jeff finds ten times more food in the back of his car. Samantha and Jeff realize that they they will be recouped ten times for what ever they give out to anyone, not just Harry, while driving that specific car. A woman with a gun takes some money from Jeff. Later, he drops off a gangster, but finds a bag in the back of the car, containing a million $. Samantha and Jeff are overwhelmed, but the gangster calls them, claiming they stole his money. Jeff is forced to give the gangster the money to save his life. He had a small statue of Shani, the god of karma.

Independent fantasy drama "Instant Karma" is a gentle contemplation on whether people do good deeds only because they know they will get some sort of a reward for it, or if they do good deeds out of their own honest, altruistic conviction. The basic premise—a car magically reimburses the driver Jeff tenfold for every item he gives out to someone—is intruiguing, acting almost as some sort of a "guaranteed investement", and has a certain degree of awe and excitement in the first half. The movie has some neat little details and artistic touches, such as the supporting character of the homeless Harry who has a few humorous signs on the street (such as "Blah, blah, blah...Money... Blah, blah, blah... Food... Who reads signs anyway? Please help" or "My wife told me to wait here. That was 10 years ago") or the idea that singer Josh West enters Jeff's car and accepts to sing to Samantha on the iPhone, upon which the movie transitions elegantly from the lyrics Josh West sings live to the lyrics Josh West sings in the song in the music montage, in which Jeff driving the car and giving items to Harry. The cinematography is great, using several drone shots which give the movie a modern look. However, the story loses steam in the middle, effectively not being able to "squeeze" much more out of this concept in the second half. The remaining plot rides on a repetitive wave, since there are no more surprises or further versatile takes on said plot, except in the strange finale, where the movie suddenly shifts to a crime film, which feels shoehorned. Despite giving the movie intensity, this crime finale came way too late into the story to feel like it fits, and instead feels more like an "intruder". Though it has a clever little trick: a gangster tells Jeff he has the chance to pick his own outcome on a piece of paper—on one paper, it is written "Let you go", and on the other, "Kill you". However, the gangster writes down "Kill you" on both papers. Jeff, however, outfoxes him when he picks one paper, and eats, claiming that since the other paper has "Kill you" written on it, he must have picked the "Let you go" paper. While it could have been more inspired in exploiting all the potentials of the concept, "Instant Karma" offers some thoughtful observations on balance in the world, selfishness, honesty, and righteousness.

Grade:++

Ordet

Ordet; drama, Denmark, 1955, D: Carl Theodor Dreyer, S: Henrik Malberg, Emil Hass Christensen, Birgitte Federspiel, Preben Lerdorff Rye, Cay Kristiansen  

A farm somewhere in Denmark, run by the Borgen family. The 27-year old Johannes lost his mind and now preaches in the meadow to nobody, thinking he is the reincarnation of Jesus; his brother Mikkel is losing his faith, and awaits his third child with his pregnant wife, Inger; the youngest brother, Anders, is in love with Anne Petersen, but her father is against the marriage because they belong to a different religious denomination than the Borgens. Anders’ father Morten tries to persuade Mr. Petersen to allow the marriage, but to no avail. During childbirth, Inger delivers a stillborn baby, and dies herself later. Johannes disappears, but returns for the funeral and invokes God to bring Inger back to life. Miraculously, Inger indeed awakens, and hugs Mikkel.  

Included in Roger Ebert’s Great Movies list, Carl Theodor Dreyer’s penultimate film, and his only one filmed in the 19 50s, “Ordet” is a simple, minimalist, but demanding contemplation on the power of faith made in the raw, ascetic style of Tarkovsky and Bresson—who also incorporated Christian themes of suffering in the cruel world until salvation and nirvana in one way or another, bringing about a catharsis, almost as a reward for the characters enduring the hardships while keeping their good heart. “Ordet” is indeed very good, but still a little bit overrated. It is better written in the first half, where it has some inspired dialogue ("I believe a lot of miracles happen secretly", says Inger), as opposed to the second half which has too much conventional, almost soap opera-like lines. Likewise, its pacing is uneven, sometimes absorbing and fascinating, sometimes lingering for so long until it starts to drag. Its biggest problem is that the story is deeply entrenched into an ideology (in this case, religion), and thus lost its appeal to the non-religious viewers.  

The dialogues are pretty clever in the first half. Mikkel is a symbol for the rational man to whom religion plays less and less of a role in his life, claiming that he doesn’t even have “faith in faith” anymore, whereas his brother Johannes is his extreme counterpart, so religious that he thinks he is Jesus. Their father Morten laments that “miracles aren’t happening anymore”, establishing a crisis among them, until a rejuvenation in the finale. A few neat symbols are displayed, such as the long take in the meadow, where Johannes goes to the left, and Morten, Mikken and Anders go after him—almost to place a subliminal image that they will be following him in the end. The doctor, after helping save Inger’s life, later gently teases Morten: “What do you think helped more: my medicine or your prayers?” That is the only moment in the film that takes a more critical review process of religion, which should have used more of that, since similar movies such as Bergman’s “Winter Light” and Allen’s “Hannah and her Sisters” seem much fresher today due to their more objective observations. As a movie promoting the power of religion, it is misleading and disingenuous. But it is powerful as an allegory of people trapped inside a single mindset, unable to change their grey lives, until they accept an outsider with an open mind, thinking outside the box, who shows them how to transform, restructure their lives for the better.  

Grade:+++