This is one of those rare experiences where honesty finds its brilliance. The film is vocal, vulgar, and has no filter, yet is executed monumentally well. Hard Truths is a dark comedy that is perfect for The Chicago International Film Festival. The characterizations are superb. Written and directed by Mike Leigh, the writing that is part tragedy part comedy are a recipe for many laughs as well as moments which transition to seriousness.
The film focuses on Pansy (played by Marianne Jeanne-Baptiste), who is trying to navigate her own life and struggles. The setting is the United Kingdom. Pansy is vocal and tells the truth without holding back as she keeps fighting to make a point. The story is a portrait of a strong-willed African American woman in an English setting. She is trying to help her depressed son Moses (played by Tuwaine Barrett) while at the same time dealing with other conflicts in her family. The twist to this dark comedy is that the problem is Pansy.
The film is about navigating reality and facing consequences, but also about how society reacts when not everyone is on the same page. The cultural dynamics explore many different rituals and difficult scenarios. It is a joyful rollercoaster that feels bipolar, but the writing is successful at turning the negative into an attention-grabbing work of art. Three-and-a-half out of four stars.
The sequel feels promising. The beginning delivers that menacing momentum. It picks up a few days after the events of the first film. Its transition goes right to have its shock value. That “shock value” is the menacing grins (aka the title itself). Smile 2 holds its grip on terror. The redundancy comes around.
There is a form of feeling like an old-school horror film. That is because the opening title feels like an Alfred Hitchcock approach. There is a red background over the sequencing (of the introduction). From this, the film begins on a high note (creating discomfort for scares). The progression of Smile 2 remains average.
The new target of a nightmare is Skye Riley (played by Naomi Scott). Skye is a high-profile pop artist with a massive following. She has a deadly past of addiction and burning bridges, but her fame is the center of her life. Her life spirals downward when a fatal turn of events has evil followed her repeatedly. Beginning with dark moments from a friend named Lewis (played by Lukas Gage), a pattern of an unstoppable force is in every corner of Skye.
The image in Skye’s head seems to be people who “smile” incessantly. It contains an omen-like vibe. It comes to her mind every day. The horror puts her label in jeopardy. The evil does not stop.
It is entertaining for the first ninety minutes. After that, it seems that important points from the first film are thrown in to wrap up easily. It goes down the path of having more destruction evolve vigorously. There are moments with car chases and hospital peril. Hence the definition of redundancy. The many elements of suspense come together when a situation is awry.
The events from the first film are (almost) forgettable. It is looped in briefly (not entirely). Smile 2 tries to bring the evil to a new level (by tying it in to expand it with an artist). The burning bridges are all around the demonic “smiles.” It is a (gradual) sequel where momentum is in tune (at the top of the film), but then quirkiness alters its sophistication. That is because the twists tend to show up (without explanation). It is a concert tour going down the slippery slope of mass destruction. There are many “smiles” at concerts for audiences, but this one may not have the type of movie audiences may anticipate.
The direction of director Parker Finn fuels characterization. The performance of Scott is where Smile 2 delivers the terrifying factors. That is because she is the one who possesses extreme anxiety. She must run from the demons. She must deal with the tormenting moving parts. The state of anxiety (in Scott’s performance) is where the tension of Smile 2 boils inevitably. The craziness of unexplained evil (creating a dangerous impact) fuels the fire. While the rest of the film is a blur, its main character is the savior. It is still invigorating to be thought-provoking. Its execution is (slightly) flawed—two out of four stars for Smile 2.
A couple finding each other and going through many woah moments has a humanistic approach in We Live in Time. It has authenticity of connection and what it means to be present of love. It also has the dynamic of challenges—the conflicts of the characters themselves. Directed by John Crowley, a love story that has resilience. Stunning performances by Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh. Garfield and Pugh are the knockout couple that thrive the realism of We Live in Time.
This is the plot of We Live in Time. Garfield plays Tobias and Pugh plays Almut. Tobias is one who has just went through a divorce, and Almut is a growing chef. They are brought together by an accidental event which leads to love at first sight. Together, their romance and feelings for each other are deep. They have the personalities of wanting to be together forever. At the same time though, life brings in conflicts that require a lot of mental thinking. Together, they weave the hard times and happy times of their love life. They have continuous disagreements, and “time” is of the essence. We Live in Time boils turmoil by trying to find the true meaning of the love that is beneath Tobias and Almut.
The conflict of challenging the relationship is that Almut has stage three ovarian cancer, and she continues to do her chef work and grow her image. This creates the rough patch of We Live in Time. My appreciation for the film’s concept of being able to channel emotions is how it looks at its impact of truth and honesty. “Truth” of an illness and “honesty” of its mental impact. Tobias and Almut want to feel their love forever, but at the same time, they want their mind to be fueled by the other aspects of life where they feel inspired. A lot of the “feel inspired” is Almut wanting to continue her growth as a chef. At the same time, they grow a family with one daughter.
There is a moment of teaching quality that just thrives the fascination of Pugh’s performance. In her role as Almut, she gives a step-by-step direction on how to crack eggs properly. There is meaning behind this element of quality. It is in her words as she says, “Versatility of the egg knows no bounds.” From this quote, that just delivers that loving and honest message that once a commitment begins, it is one where being committed has a direction for the long run. “The long run” is how supporting the relationship is through the eyes of Tobias and Almut. Will Tobias support Almut through her illness? Will Almut and Tobias be together forever? Where does their relationship have their most meanings? There is lots to take in with We Live in Time. There are no emotional boundaries. There is the pattern of love hitting deficits and then rebuilding with what matters—that is the definition of togetherness with many frequent slates. Three out of four stars for We Live in Time.
Movies with Tarek 