brentsbulletinboard

Filmmaking that calls for its audiences to study up on its source material (not to mention the life of the creator of that source material) before screening it is, in my opinion, irresponsible, placing an undue burden on viewers in advance. Indeed, if a picture is unable to stand on its own to be at least modestly comprehensible on its face, then that's a production with an innate handicap from the outset. Such is the case with director Luca Guadagnino's film adaptation of author William S. Burroughs's 1985 semi-autobiographical novella, a glacially paced, meandering, pretentious, often-inscrutable work of smug cinematic nonsense. The film tells the story of William Lee (Daniel Craig), a gay, well-heeled American expat living in Mexico in 1950. He spends much of his time as a barfly in search of fulfilling incessant hedonistic appetites, particularly his pursuit of a young former GI, Eugene Allerton (Drew Starkey), a handsome but ambivalent, noncommittal flirt whose sexual orientation is unclear at best. However, once Lee finally manages to catch the eye of his romantic prospect, the two launch into an on-again/off-again relationship in which they vie for control of the direction it will ultimately take. This rocky odyssey takes them from Mexico to Ecuador and eventually to the South American jungle, where they go in search of the plants used to make ayahuasca. And, in the process, the story becomes an increasingly unfocused, preposterous collection of quasi-psychedelic imagery and surrealistic sequences that make little coherent sense. It's so ridiculous, in fact, that the narrative becomes laughable, making the filmmaker's earlier pictures "Call Me By Your Name" (2017) and "Suspiria" (2018) look like pillars of sparkling eloquence by comparison. The fault here lies in a dreadful script full of holes and unexplained developments borne out of lapses in coherence. To its credit, the film's gorgeous and sometimes-inventive cinematography is admirable, backed by a fine production design and unexpectedly suitable soundtrack. The picture also features Craig's best screen performance to date, one that shows off the depth of his talent and has earned him numerous accolades, despite the abysmal quality of the material he's been handed to work with. And it provides a fitting vehicle for a surprisingly effective comedic turn by Jason Schwartzman. At the same time, though, the casting is hampered by Starkey's sleepwalking portrayal, one that's about as appetizing as a bowl of reheated canned soup, and a positively embarrassing performance by the usually-reliable Lesley Manville. Without a doubt, movies based on material written by Burroughs are undeniably an acquired taste, but this latest offering drawn from his repertoire represents a serious lack of cognizance, engagement and enlightenment. By all means, please skip this one.

Philosophers and metaphysicians are generally quick to agree that we're all fundamentally connected, both to one another and to everything around us, that there's a certain universality binding all there is in our existence. But how many of us actually take the time to truly recognize, consider and appreciate this? Maybe this calls for stepping away from our everyday world and immersing ourselves in some sort of alternate version of it to see the inherent connections and the value that lie therein. That's what writer-actor-director Matthew Rankin so eloquently shows us in his second feature outing, an absurdist fable of seemingly unrelated stories that ultimately tie together to illustrate the bonds that unite us and how we can put them to best use for our collective benefit. This triptych of tall tales tells the stories of a Quebec government worker (Rankin) who quits his job to return home to visit his long-estranged mother in Winnipeg; a part-time tour guide (Pirouz Nemati) who leads small bands of visitors on an excursion of mundane, unimpressive alleged tourist sites in Manitoba's capital city; and a pair of concerned grade school classmates (Rojina Esmaeili, Saba Vahedyousefi) who try to secure funds to help a friend (Sobhan Javadi) replace his lost eye glasses when they fall off and are quickly pilfered by a crafty. Free-roaming wild turkey. The assistance these individuals freely offer to others (and receive from them in kind) to get through the quirky challenges of these bizarre circumstances, in turn, reveals the unspoken "universal language" that binds all of us - our mutual compassion and support for one another, particularly those in need. All of this is set against the backdrop of an alternate version of Canada (where the primary language is Farsi) in winter, providing a fitting setting for wending our way through the cold world that surrounds us. "Universal Language" thus serves up a heartwarming, gentle yet insightful story that reminds us of our innate linkage and the goodwill that we're all capable of unselfishly extending to one another when warranted, something that, ideally, should come to us as second nature, as it does for the characters in this film. And all of this is nestled into a wealth of hilarious, off-the-wall humor, coming across like a mixture of Monty Python and Federico Fellini. Admittedly, the film's opening act may seem somewhat disjointed and perhaps even a bit too idiosyncratic for its own good at times, but these issues gradually dissipate as the picture plays out and the pieces of its various story threads begin piecing themselves together, revealing the aforementioned intrinsic connections among us. This delightful indie gem has largely flown below the radar thus far, despite its awards, nominations and rave reception at the 2024 Cannes Film Festival, as well as its designation as one of the National Board of Review's Top 5 International Films of last year. Indeed, at a time when it seems like there's so much dividing us, it's gratifying to see a release like this, one that tenderly spotlights more of what binds us than what sets us apart.

In the late 1960s and throughout the 1970s, four gifted British musicians took center stage as the biggest rock band in the world - Led Zeppelin. Born in 1968 out of their predecessors, the Yardbirds, the quartet of lead singer Robert Plant, guitarist Jimmy Page, bassist John Paul Jones and drummer John Bonham took the US and UK by storm with their unique fusion of hard rock tinged with blues, folk and supernatural influences. The band subsequently became the first group to unseat the Beatles from the top of the music charts - quite a feat, even if the Beatles were on the verge of breaking up at the time - and released a string of blockbuster LPs that eschewed the typical "singles" approach previously employed by other artists, a shift perfectly timed to cater to the emerging "album rock" format of many underground and independent FM radio stations. Their origin story is now brought to life in writer-director Bernard MacMahon's documentary feature, chronicling how Led Zeppelin came together and running through the time of their ascendancy as the premier rock band of a new decade. The key to appreciating this film, however, is understanding a key word in its title - "becoming." The filmmaker specifically focuses on the careers of the four musicians before they came together as Led Zeppelin and what happened during the newly formed band's infancy, amassing a following that exploded over the course of roughly two years. In recent interviews with Plant, Page and Jones, as well as excerpts from a previously unreleased archive conversation with Bonham (who died in 1980), viewers learn about their diverse upbringings, their various musical influences, the impact of a volatile and radically changing culture at the time and their respective performance careers prior to the group's formation, largely as studio session musicians. Through these dialogues, audiences can see how these elements came to characterize them both individually as artists and collectively as Led Zeppelin. This material reveals a number of interesting tidbits about the band and its members, such as Jimmy Page's work as a session guitarist on the theme song to the James Bond film "Goldfinger" (1964), as well as the little-known source of the renamed group's new moniker, a suggestion made by drummer Keith Moon of The Who. Diehard fans are sure to appreciate the meticulous level of detail presented here, though casual followers and the unfamiliar might just as easily see it as overkill. That's especially true given that the film's narrative feels like it stops short of its potential. Wrapping up the picture early on in the band's career may leave some viewers disappointed, especially since the film pays no attention to the group's later (and perhaps better-known) work, such as details about their classic cuts on subsequent albums. Consequently, some might see this film as being "incomplete," almost as if it were the first installment of a longer production, such as the kind of documentary miniseries that one might view on PBS or one of the cable network music channels. Nevertheless, there are also qualities that make this a stand-out work, such as showcasing the arguably underrated virtuosity of the band's four members, musicians whose talents likely haven't been regarded as highly as they maybe should have been over the years. It also makes clear how the band was more than the sum of its parts, how each of these performers came together to create something greater than just the fusion of four individual talents. And, for those who grew up during the period of the band's birth (as I did), this offering truly is a finely constructed piece of nostalgia, one that definitely tugs at highly personal memories of a remarkable time that hasn't been repeated since. So, when considered in total, "Becoming Led Zeppelin" is probably best viewed as a mixed bag that some will likely worship as much as they do the band itself, while others may find it a modestly engaging, albeit "unfinished" introduction to one of the most monumental rock bands of all time. And, in that sense, then, the picture might be best typified by a paraphrase of one of Led Zeppelin's iconic song titles - what is and what will never be.