Kneecap” and “Oddity” Both Hit Their Mark

There are two films out at the moment both of which are sur­pris­ing­ly watch­able. First up is Odd­i­ty, an Irish hor­ror film.

I’m very much not a hor­ror fan and our abil­i­ty to pro­duce com­pe­tent­ly made low bud­get genre films here in Ire­land is, with­out putting too fine a point on it, uncon­vinc­ing. So I seat­ed myself on the aisle, con­fi­dent that I’d be leav­ing after about twen­ty minutes. 

What a plea­sure to be proved so thor­ough­ly wrong. As its writer direc­tor Dami­an McCarthy is the first to admit, it makes no attempt at break­ing the mould and is quite con­tent to rely on the usu­al assort­ment of well-worn tropes and types. 

What’s a girl to do?

A women is on her own in a large, sprawl­ing house in the mid­dle of nowhere, and when she goes back inside from the pitch dark­ness after retriev­ing some­thing from her car, there’s a loud knock at the door. 

It’s a man who has, he tells her, just escaped from a lunatic asy­lum, and he’s come to warn her that while she was in her car, he saw some­one enter her house. That man is in there now!! All she has to do is let this wide-eyed lunatic in, and he’ll go in, find him and save her. 

What’s she to do?

For once, the fact that there’s so lit­tle that’s orig­i­nal about the film is exact­ly what makes it so enjoy­able. Odd­i­ty hits each of the age old marks just so, so that the brief bursts of gen­uine if mild anx­i­ety are imme­di­ate­ly tem­pered by know­ing recog­ni­tion. Deliv­er­ing just the right mix of sus­pense, the super­nat­ur­al and pure hokum. 

Tight­ly script­ed, well-act­ed and with excel­lent use of sound, Odd­i­ty is one of the few films it’s worth both­er­ing going out to the cin­e­ma for this summer. 

My expec­ta­tions around Kneecap were even low­er, and I plant­ed myself in the aisle seat of the front row, expect­ing to remain there for no more than 8 or 9 min­utes. Once again, how nice to be proved wrong. 

Instead of the usu­al suc­ces­sion of unfun­ny skits per­formed by embar­rass­ing­ly wood­en pop pup­pets in a film con­spic­u­ous­ly devoid of any­thing approx­i­mat­ing an actu­al plot, Kneecap boasts impres­sive per­for­mances from one and all. And not just from Michael Fass­ben­der, whose gen­er­ous par­tic­i­pa­tion must have helped con­sid­er­ably in get­ting the project off the ground. 

Kneecap are, osten­si­bly, a hip-hop trio from Belfast on a mis­sion to spread the word on the Irish lan­guage. Impres­sive­ly, all three offer up pol­ished and at times even sub­tle per­for­mances that sug­gest their future is more like­ly to be on a sound stage than in the record­ing stu­dio. And the film is pro­pelled by pacey direc­tion in a con­fi­dent­ly plot­ted sto­ry that expert­ly fields its pol­i­tics with informed aplomb. 

It’s instant­ly dis­pos­able of course, and no one’s going to be lis­ten­ing to that kind of sub-Beast­ie Boys music in 12 months’ time, but the film deliv­ers an instant hit with incred­i­ble ener­gy and gen­uine humour. And so long as you go in with appro­pri­ate­ly low expec­ta­tions, you’ll be as pleas­ant­ly sur­prised as I was. In short, it’s a riot. 

Odd­i­ty won an audi­ence award at this year’s SXSW and Kneecap did the same thing at this year’s Sun­dance. You can see the trail­er for Odd­i­ty here:

And the trail­er for Kneecap here:

Sign up for a sub­scrip­tion right or below, and I shall keep you post­ed every month, on All the very best and worst in film, tele­vi­sion and music!

Jeanne Dielman’ Vs ‘Citizen Kane’

Every ten years since 1952, Sight and Sound has issued its 100 Great­est Films of All Time list, which it com­piles by can­vass­ing opin­ions from a selec­tion of over 1,500 inter­na­tion­al film crit­ics. And for most of those eight decades, top of that list sat Cit­i­zen Kane.

But in 2012, Jeanne Diel­man, 23 Com­merce Quay, 1080 Brus­sels broke into the top 50, and became the first film direct­ed by a woman to do so. Ten years lat­er, in 2022, it ascend­ed to the sum­mit to dethrone Kane and was offi­cial­ly declared the great­est film ever made. 

It was always a lit­tle unfair to sad­dle Cit­i­zen Kane with the great­est­fil­mo­fall­time tag, it’s far more instruc­tive to think of it as the first ful­ly realised film of the new medium.

For the first four decades of the 20th cen­tu­ry, tech­nol­o­gy and the lan­guage of cin­e­ma adapt­ed in tan­dem, the one respond­ing to the oth­er. But by the time Orson Welles came to make Cit­i­zen Kane in 1940, faster film stock, lighter cam­era equip­ment and pur­pose-built sound stages meant that he was able to explore the exploit the lan­guage and gram­mar of film in a way that nobody pre­vi­ous­ly had been able to. 

What’s so exhil­a­rat­ing about Kane is that Welles explores every con­ceiv­able facet of the lan­guage of cin­e­ma in the one film. From dis­guised match dis­solves, whip-pans and in-cam­era trick­ery to cam­eras that ran on tracks from under­neath the sound stage, and a sound design that has only ever been matched since by the lone fig­ures of Robert Alt­man and David Lynch.

It’s not hard to see why, in this of all times, crit­ics might be drawn to a film like Jeanne Diel­man. It is essen­tial­ly the anti-Kane film, in that it’s anti-nar­ra­tive, a‑cinematic, un-French and very much a repost to the oth­er­wise dom­i­nant male gaze. It would be nei­ther unfair nor inac­cu­rate to describe it as the arche­typ­al me-too film.

The film fol­lows a bour­geois, mid­dle aged wid­ow over the course of three days as she method­i­cal­ly goes about her dai­ly chores. Prepar­ing the evening meal for her teenage son, clean­ing the house, and sex­u­al­ly ser­vic­ing the male client that arrives each after­noon, and whose mon­ey she relies on to be able to pay the rent. On the sec­ond day, she starts to unrav­el, and on the third she had a breakdown.

Almost every scene is filmed in one long take, on a sin­gle cam­era that sits at waist height, with almost no edit­ing and absolute­ly no trick­ery what­so­ev­er. And what we see her doing, in a defi­ant­ly anti-nar­ra­tive vein, are all the things that con­ven­tion­al nar­ra­tive cin­e­ma leaves out. 

So when, for instance, she sits down at the kitchen table and begins to peel the first of four pota­toes, you just know the cam­era is going to sit there duti­ful­ly record­ing her as she method­i­cal­ly pro­ceeds to peel all four of them, one after the oth­er. In one long and tri­umphant­ly undra­mat­ic sin­gle take.

Andy Warhol

In oth­er words, it’s cov­er­ing the same ter­rain, themes and sub­ject mat­ter as the won­der­ful Agnes War­da, but it does so by com­bin­ing the stric­tures and anti-tech­niques that Andy Warhol had pio­neered in the 60s, with the sto­ries told in Polanski’s The Ten­ant and Bunuel’s Belle De Jour.

All of which might have been okay over a crisp 90 min­utes. But it’s t h r e e  and a h a l f hours long. I know in my ear­ly twen­ties, I’d have proud­ly sat all the way through this sort of thing, before loud­ly bor­ing my friends about it over end­less pints. But at this stage of my life, I have to con­fess, I found it so mes­mer­i­cal­ly dull that it quick­ly became torturous. 

There are, hap­pi­ly, an ever-larg­er num­ber of films direct­ed by women that deserve to be loud­ly cel­e­brat­ed: Debra Granik’s Leave no Trace (2018) and Winter’s Bone (2010), Jane Campion’s Bright Star (2009) and The Pow­er of the Dog (2021), Lynne Ramsay’s Morvern Callar (2002) and You Were Nev­er Real­ly There (2017), Kel­ly Reichardt’s Meek’s Cut­off (2010), Char­lotte Wells’ After­sun (2022) (reviewed by me here), Sami­ra Makhmalbaf’s The Apple (1998), Sal­ly Pot­ter ‘s Orlan­do (1992), Agnès Varda’s Cléo from 5 to 7 (1962) and Lina Wertmuller’s Blood Feud, (1978).

All of which rep­re­sent a won­der­ful con­tin­u­a­tion of the explo­ration and exper­i­men­ta­tion that Welles had begun with Cit­i­zen Kane, which was and is a giant of a film. Jeanne Diel­man is not.

Watch the 2 trail­ers below, and decide which of the two films you’d be most excit­ed about sit­ting through.

Sign up for a sub­scrip­tion, right or below, and I’ll keep you post­ed every month, on All the very best and worst in film, tele­vi­sion and music!

Arooj Aftab’s new album, Night Reign

Arooj Aftab came on to most people’s radar with her third solo album, Vul­ture Prince, in 2021. Mar­ry­ing ele­ments of exper­i­men­tal jazz and tra­di­tion­al folk music from her native Pak­istan with the sort of urbane pop that the likes of Sade and Enya con­coct, the result was a plain­tive and evoca­tive explo­ration of her attempt to deal with the death of her younger brother. 

That album’s suc­cess and the Gram­my it won her gen­er­at­ed sig­nif­i­cant pres­sure around a fol­low-up album so Aftab took a time out to form a trio with the jazz pianist Vijay Iyer and the mul­ti-instru­men­tal­ist Shahzad Ismai­ly. And in 2023 they released their Love In Exile album.

Iyer and Ismai­ly reap­pear here on her fourth solo album, Night Reign, where they’re joined by Gyan Riley, son of min­i­mal­ist pio­neer Ter­ry, the harpist Maeve Gilchrist and Elvis Costel­lo, who makes a cameo on, improb­a­bly, the Wurlitzer.

Ini­tial­ly, the album was going to focus exclu­sive­ly on set­ting the poet­ry of Mah Laqa Bai Chan­da, the first woman to pub­lish poet­ry in Urdu, to music. But in the end, just two of the album’s tracks are set to Bai’s words. And instead, she wise­ly decides to open the album up to give it a broad­er, more cos­mopoli­tan hue. 

So that, even more so than with her pre­vi­ous album, Night Reign moves with ease from Eng­lish into Urdu and back, and back and forth between the worlds of jazz, pop and tra­di­tion­al Pak­istani folk music. 

What’s so sat­is­fy­ing about the expe­ri­ence of lis­ten­ing to the album is the sense you get of its ‘uni­ty of com­po­si­tion’, which Aftab achieves thanks to her dual roles as vocal­ist and pro­duc­er. The 20 years and more she’s spent per­fect­ing her craft in both guis­es allows her to meld those poten­tial­ly dis­parate worlds and fuse them togeth­er into an organ­ic and cap­ti­vat­ing whole. 

Night Reign exudes appar­ent­ly effort­less poise and is an album you can enjoy equal­ly in the inti­mate pri­va­cy of your head­phones, or on repeat, for hours, on in the background.

The boys from Pitch­fork gave it an 8.3 here

Watch the video for Raat Ki Rani here:

Sign up for a sub­scrip­tion right or below and I shall keep you post­ed every month on All the very best and worst in film, tele­vi­sion and music!

Season 3 of the sumptuous “My Brilliant Friend”

The Rai/HBO adap­ta­tion of Ele­na Fer­rante’s revered quar­tet of Neapoli­tan nov­els returns for its third sea­son (it’s been out, truth­ful­ly, for a while now), and if any­thing it’s even more impres­sive than sea­sons one and two.

My Bril­liant Friend, which is both the title of the first nov­el and of the over­all series, fol­lows Lenu (as in Ele­na) and Lila as they move through child­hood into adult­hood and maturity. 

With one leav­ing the squalor and cor­rup­tion of the impov­er­ished neigh­bour­hood in Naples where they grow up to become a suc­cess­ful nov­el­ist. And the oth­er stay­ing behind to stand in defi­ance against every­thing that bares down on her in those unfor­giv­ing environs. 

And through all the men, and sex, and births and betray­als and suc­cess and fail­ure, the one thing that holds firm is the depth of their fierce friend­ship, forged as it was in fire of youth.

Ferrante’s tetral­o­gy occu­pies a curi­ous space. Like the nov­els of Bret Eas­t­on Ellis and Philip Roth, they’re clear­ly and unapolo­get­i­cal­ly lit­er­ary, but they’re far too suc­cess­ful to be classed as pure­ly lit­er­ary. The clos­est com­par­i­son is prob­a­bly Tom Wolfe’s Bon­fire of the Van­i­ties

Remark­ably, the tele­vi­sion series not only does jus­tice to the orig­i­nal, if any­thing it improves on it. And it’ll be inter­est­ing to see what they do to cor­rect the fact that, between our­selves, the fourth of the nov­els isn’t quite as unput­down­able as the pre­vi­ous three, and rather drifts off.

What My Bril­liant Friend does so suc­cess­ful­ly is to use the close up of its inti­mate por­traits of two female friends and set them against the back­drop of every­thing that was hap­pen­ing in Italy. As it moves from the con­ser­vatism of the 50s, to the vibran­cy of the 60s and the agi­ta­tion of the 70s. 

What the tele­vi­sion series does, even more impres­sive­ly, is to present us with an unro­man­ti­cised pic­ture of how harsh life can be for all too ordi­nary peo­ple liv­ing on the periph­ery. But to do so by mould­ing exquis­ite­ly craft­ed images with metic­u­lous­ly com­bined sounds. The result is both vis­cer­al­ly real, and at once glo­ri­ous­ly cin­e­mat­ic and defi­ant­ly romantic. 

My Bril­liant Friend proves that not every­thing that has hap­pened in the world of film and tele­vi­sion is all bad. A cen­tu­ry ago, you would have had to go to a bespoke, art house cin­e­ma to find fare such as this. Films deter­mined to zoom in on the very local but to do so in widescreen tech­ni­colour cinemascope.

Like the Sici­ly we’re pre­sent­ed with in Tornatore’s Cin­e­ma Par­adiso, or the Provence of Claude Berri’s Jean de Flo­rette and Manon des Sources, or with De Sica’s pair of rov­ing, work­ing class lovers in Sun­flower (reviewed by me ear­li­er here).

Today, it’s not only read­i­ly avail­able on a tele­vi­sion near you, there are four sea­sons of eight episodes each. And each one is com­plete­ly and com­pelling­ly believ­able and at once tri­umphant­ly and glo­ri­ous­ly escapist.

Watch the trail­er to My Bril­liant Friend here

Sign up for a sub­scrip­tion right or below and I shall keep you post­ed every month on All the very best and worst in film, tele­vi­sion and music!

Close Your Eyes”, a new film from Víctor Erice

Vet­er­an Span­ish film mak­er Víc­tor Erice emerged in 1973 with his haunt­ing fea­ture debut, The Spir­it of the Bee­hive. Ten years lat­er, he was all set to deliv­er his sec­ond, much-await­ed fea­ture, when the pro­duc­er out-Amber­son­ed him. 

Orson Welles had famous­ly seen his sec­ond film and the fol­low up to Cit­i­zen Kane uncer­e­mo­ni­ous­ly muti­lat­ed by RKO. When the stu­dio saw how down­beat the sec­ond half of The Mag­nif­i­cent Amber­sons was, and under­stood the irony of its title, they instruct­ed his edi­tor to cut the final 40 min­utes (yes, that’s forty) and add on an oh so tacky hap­py ending. 

Not to be out­done, when Erice’s pro­duc­er found out that El Sur (’83) had a sim­i­lar­ly sus­pect sec­ond half planned, he sim­ply refused to allow him to film its sec­ond half. So unsur­pris­ing­ly, the direc­tor has dis­owned it.

Ten years lat­er, Erice made the ele­giac doc­u­men­tary fea­ture, The Quince Tree Sun (’92). And now, thir­ty years after that, he has, at the age of 82, returned with his fourth fea­ture, Close Your Eyes

The film oper­ates on two lev­els. On its sur­face, a vet­er­an film mak­er ends up re-vis­it­ing the events around a film he’d been mak­ing over two decades ago, when the prin­ci­pal actor, and his close per­son­al friend, had sud­den­ly and inex­plic­a­bly dis­ap­peared with­out trace. Was it real­ly sui­cide, or did some­thing else take place?

But real­ly, the film is an explo­ration of mem­o­ry and loss, of roads not tak­en and the life that was lived as opposed to the many that remain only par­tial­ly embarked upon. The hand­ful of things you said yes to, and the many oth­ers that some­how slipped through your fin­gers to dis­ap­pear in the sand at your feet.

Close Your Eyes is not mere­ly one of the bet­ter films of the year, it’s one if the best. But your response, rather like the film itself, will reg­is­ter on two levels. 

Of course, it almost goes with­out say­ing, to see any­thing new from Erice is some­thing to be wel­comed with unbri­dled joy. And the fact that the film is, as I say, com­fort­ably in the top ten per cent of films made any­where in the world in 2023, is a mon­u­men­tal relief and to be loud­ly heralded. 

But The Spir­it of the Bee­hive and The Quince Tree Sun were both in the top one per cent of the films made when they came out. Which isn’t to sug­gest that Close Your Eyes is in any way dis­ap­point­ing. It’s just not the daz­zling, celes­tial tri­umph we’d all hoped it might be. The prob­lem, very sim­ply, is its length. 

There’s real­ly no need for its near three hours. As sac­ri­le­gious as this is to say out loud, I wish an edi­tor had been brought in to care­ful­ly cull it down to a trim two hours. There’s no need for any of the scenes in Andalu­cia, and those nuns, charm­ing as they are, should have been briefly glimpsed as non-speak­ing extras. 

It is of course com­plete­ly under­stand­able, not to say com­mend­able, that he should have want­ed to give as many of his col­lab­o­ra­tors as many moments in the sun as he could muster. But it’s hard not to qui­et­ly wish that he were a far less gen­er­ous col­lab­o­ra­tor and a slight­ly more rig­or­ous film maker. 

All of which is to quib­ble. Watch Close Your Eyes, it’s one of the best films of the year. And then treat your­self to The Spir­it of the Bee­hive, and The Quince Tree Sun.

You can see the trail­er to Close Your Eyes below:

Sign up for a sub­scrip­tion right or below, and I shall keep you post­ed every month, on All the very best and worst in film, tele­vi­sion and music!