This post continues from Part I yesterday, in which I gave my thoughts on five films I saw at the Chicago Film Festival. Now here are five more!
Tangles has been one of my most anticipated films since I heard how well received it was at Cannes. This is an R-rated Canadian animated feature, based on a graphic novel / memoir by cartoonist Sarah Leavitt. The story follows Sarah (voiced by Abbi Jacobson), whose life as a queer artist in San Francisco is interrupted when her mother Midge (voiced by Julia Louis-Dreyfus) is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s.
It’s always great to see a western-animated film with more adult themes, and Tangles definitely earns its R-rating with the time it spends focused on Sarah’s sexual interests. If you’re looking for good queer representation, I think you’ll almost definitely love how Sarah’s relationship with her partner Donimo (voiced by Samira Wiley) is depicted. The relationship can’t be the focus of the film with everything else going on in Sarah’s life — and not being able to balance her family and her love life is one the central problems of the film — but enough attention is put to it to really get you invested in their romance.
The movie a great sense of humor, with so many fun recurring bits it builds up through the movie, providing plenty comic relief from the film’s heavier themes. It helps that it has an all-star set of comedic talents in its voice cast. The film makes room for voices like Bryan Cranston, Beanie Feldstein, Bowen Yang, and Wanda Sykes (among others) to all get their fun moments. I will say when you hear Seth Rogen’s voice in the film, he makes such a loud entrance I almost found it distracting, but by the end I loved his surprisingly pivotal part.
Of course, the emotional throughline is Sarah’s relationship with her mother Midge as her condition worsens. This is a film where you’re aware the whole time you’re watching that it’s going to emotional devastate you at the end, and it absolutely does. The specific moment that brought me to tears maybe wasn’t the most obvious point to cry, but suffice to say the tears did roll. I perhaps would have liked to have seen more of Sarah and Midge’s relationship before her condition emerged, but what we get between them is impactful enough. I’ve luckily never had to go through this experience with an elder relative, but imagine it will be painful for anyone who has to see what Sarah goes through with her mother in this film. But in a way it less about the disease and more how Sarah and the rest of her family responds. I think the writing is quite strong in how it demonstrates every character struggling to accept what is happening to their loved one, but expressing that burden in different ways. While some of her family members try to go forth as if it’s not happening, Sarah desperately tries to take control of a situation she has no power over.
Despite being an animated film, its strength is more in its writing than its visuals. I don’t dislike film’s look, which brings Levitt’s cartoonist style into motion–but it did take me time to get used to it. Of course it’s not dazzling in the way something like Wildwood (which I saw the same weekend) is — but it does take advantage of the medium in the occasional moments where it becomes more surreal. I do believe animation was the right choice to tell this story, especially for the style of comedy to succeed.
Tangles is not a film that will surprise you narratively, and it’s entirely straightforward in themes. But it’s made with so much heart, which combined with its humor makes it so easy to enjoy. I think it is undeniably one of the most affecting films I’ll watch this year, and one of the films I’ll be most eager to recommend to people when it releases theatrically in January to make sure it doesn’t get lost in the shuffle.
A Day in the Life of Jo: Chapter Phaedra felt like one of my riskier films I chose to give a chance to at this festival. A Greek coming-of-age film from Jacqueline Lentzou, I knew little more about it than what the title implies: That it would be a day in the life of a 15-year old girl named Josephine. I did have a vague understand from reading some reactions that it would have surreal, more experimental elements. I try not to be close-minded towards more artistically risky films, but it certainly isn’t my favorite mode of filmmaking, and I was worried I’d regret devoting part of my limited time at the festival to this film.
In many ways, this turned out to be the film I worried it would be–often perplexing, often challenging to stay on its wavelength, often easy to feel detached from what it’s putting on screen. And yet for most of it, I felt incredibly delighted watching the film. For one it is surprisingly funny – not that it’s a comedy, but I think there is intentional humor in many of its stranger moments. In some ways it doesn’t feel like watching a complete film, more like catching incomplete snippets from a more classical teen movie. I found the 15-year old girl at the center of it to be quite enigmatic, I wasn’t sure I fully understood her personality — but she was compelling to watch, as the lead (Evita Andriopoulou) has quite an absorbing stare. The “Phaedra” in the movie’s title turns out to be another girl, who catches Jo’s attention with her beautiful singing voice. Despite being part of the film’s title, their “connection” feels very brief — but there is a awkward sweetness between them, which did make for one of my favorite scenes in the film.
Still, my enthusiasm would only be mild if it were just a poetic take on a teenage experience. What really makes the film is the ending, which I won’t reveal but I assure you is as out there a conclusion for this type of film as you could imagine. At first I was very confused, then I thought it was hilarious, then I wound up finding it genuinely moving. There film does set up from the start there is something stranger, more fantastical underpinning everything–but that still did not make it remotely predictable where it would end up going. And having an ending that could swing me around that much did really cement my high admiration for the movie. If you’re going to make strange art, this film is absolutely the level of strange I think you should go for.
Part of what surprised me about the ending I don’t think was actually intended to be a surprise by the filmmaker. As in, if I had read the full plot synopsis on Letterboxd or read an interview about her inspiration for the film, I would have gone in with more context and been a bit less startled. But I like that I had the experience of not knowing what was coming, as that feels true to the main character’s experience of things. But I will say it does turn out to be a quite sad story. And that makes me worry it’s a little inappropriate how much of my reaction was just amusement and how strange the film was. I realize appreciating weirdness just for weirdness’s sake is a little shallow. But I do think there is a depth to this film’s idiosyncrasy which will stick with me. Because despite how much of it I don’t genuinely understand, I do want want to toy over that ending and delve into other’s analysis of where this film goes.
I had some high hopes for Ray Gunn given Brad Bird’s track record and it apparently being a passion project of his, but I had plenty of skepticism as well. Brad Bird dusting of an ambitious project at Skydance, an animation studio so far known for completely unambitious work, did not seem not like the best idea–nor do I like the choice to team back up John Lassetter for this project. Then there’s the reported influence of Netflix, who it’s said were unwilling to let Bird do the film with 2D animation or aim for a PG-13 rating.
But despite all my concerns, it turns out if you just let Brad Bird make a fun sci-fi caper, he’s going to deliver a fun sci-fi caper. There’s a lot of that’s going in this world of pop stars and alien mobsters, but the plot twisting in a new direction so many times is part of what makes it a fun ride. It’s a tropey, old-fashion detective story — but Bird can execute a tropey adventure story as well as anyone.
I don’t like how the characters’ faces look very much, but besides that the movie is gorgeous. The design of the whole world is incredible — it’s the familiar retro-futuristic aesthetic Bird has gone for before, but from the first shots I was so glad to be seeing its pristine city-scape on the big screen and not on streaming. And while it might have been nice Bird had been allowed to do 2D animation, but the animators did a great job creating this world in 3D.
The film depicts aliens as an oppressed minority in its world, a straight forward allegory for racism and xenophobia. This is something I was very uneasy with, as replacing immigrants with alien creatures could have easily stumbled into pretty problematic commentary, no matter how well meaning Bird might be. And frankly I didn’t care for hearing the phrase “illegal alien” thrown around. But even if I find it a tad too goofy about such a serious subject, I don’t think the movie stumbles too badly — it’s a simple, pro-acceptance story, and that’s fine for what the film is. While I wouldn’t go as far as to call the level of commentary impressive, it was interesting how timely some of what comes up is for how long ago I hear this was written.
There’s no bad voice performances in this, but I do think Sam Rockwell (as the title character Ray Gunn) and Scarlett Johansson (as his pop-star love interest Venusa Nova) are fairly dull casting choices . Rockwell is the most obvious person you could get to a voice a roguish detective, feeling not that many steps removed form his characters in The Bad Guys. And Johansson is likewise the most obvious person you could cast a mysterious, beautiful woman. The romance between them is serviceable for the plot, but it’s not a relationship I found very interesting. I think everyone’s favorite character in the film will be Ray’s more cynical alien partner, Kadok, who Tom Waits provides a great voice for. And I expect most audiences will have a lot of fun with this film, whether they manage to catch it in a theater screen or on Netflix – but given how much the art direction is the highlight of the film for me, I do think the bigger the screen for it the better.
Immediately after Ray Gunn I watched Iron Boy, a French animated feature directed by Louis Clichy. Clichy is another Pixar alum, having contributed to the art of Wall-E and Up, and he co-directed two films in the Axterix franchise. Iron Boy follows a boy named Christophe, the middle child of a struggling farming family. He suffers from a condition that causes him to constantly tilt over, leading to him being forced to wear an iron brace at all times.
The draw here is the art style, which is absolutely beautiful. I don’t know how you could not have a lovely time looking at these water color landscapes and all the charmingly illustrated facial expressions of these characters… though I suppose it helps to already be fond of the French illustration style. There aren’t a lot of feature length animated movies that look like this, and it gives the film a very fantastical quality even while telling a fairly grounded story.
That said, I wouldn’t say I was immediately swept up by the narrative. Much of it feels like just a quirky story of boyhood struggles – not unenjoyable, but I didn’t feel much to connect to in it. I do tend to care a lot about stories involving disability, and in a sense you could say this film speaks to that experience, but not directly enough to really land with me. But I did start to feel the heart of the film more as it went on. The friendship (and obvious crush) Christophe developers with a girl named Clara is sweet, and the joy of music he discovers while assisting a church organist is also delightful. The movie doesn’t reach tearjerker levels, but there are moving elements, especially how the difficult relationship between Christophe and his father evolves through the film. I assume much of the film was inspired by Clichy’s upbringing, and while the story didn’t inspire great passion from me, I imagine it’s a solid reflection of a rural French upbringing.
Given what I saw at the festival and other recent animated releases, it’s cleary been a great year for the animation medium (even as AI is threatening the future of the industry.) In my headspace I’m afraid Iron Boy will mostly be overshadowed by other works, but it does have such a wonderful look, I think it still deserves its due as one of the year’s animation highlights.
I realized at the end of my film festival experience I had unintentionally loaded up on stories featuring tragic teenagers, and that running theme came to a climax with the final film I saw, La Gradiva. I had heard a lot of acclaim for this film from debut director Marine Atlan, which explores the lives of a group of French teens on a school trip to Italy. But it’s another film where I went in knowing little more than the positive reactions I had heard.
It did take some time for this slow-paced film to grab me.There’s intriguing character moments and visuals from the start, but the first scene that really made me sit up came perhaps a quarter into the film, when the class is interpreting Roman art together. Sitting in on teenagers discussing archaeology does not sound like exciting cinema, but so much is revealed by what the students have to say about that the art, and then so much tension boils up between the characters as a result, it does become a riveting moment.
There’s quiet, contemplative moments in this film I appreciated, but it was often these dialogue heavy scenes that thrilled me, because there’s something so explosive about how this film writes teenagers. The movie feels both intellectually and emotionally deep, the characters complexly conceived in a way you don’t often see young people written. We see so many contradictions in the main character Toni (played by Colas Quignard)–sometimes he seems wise beyond his years, sometimes he seems idiotic. Sometimes he seems emotionally mature, sometimes he seems closed off from his feelings. It felts like a very honest reflection of messy young adulthood. And they did an incredible job casting this ensemble of young actors, featuring many talented newcomers with memorable faces. There is one key older character, the students’ instructor Madame Mercie. Portrayed by Antonia Buresi, she is also a fascinating character, I appreciate a coming-of-age film that gives its teacher as much depth as her students.
It feels a little beyond me to do justice some of this film’s themes. I’ve read quite poetic reviews describe how the remnants of Pompeii and ancient world relate to the teenage experience. I don’t think I could describe what the film is expressing with its setting as eloquently, because I largely still have to wrap my head around it, but it is a fascinating aspect of the film. I also have to wrap my head around the film’s ending. Once again, I don’t want to say too much, but I’ve already implied this is not an uplifting version of a coming-of-age story. And in a sense the tragedy of its ending didn’t really sit right with me, but I wouldn’t go as far as to criticize it without giving more to time to think about it. There is a lot here that is difficult to engage with, but I think this film can be very emotional effective if you have the patience for it. Watching it, it felt very understandable why many critics have dubbed this a masterpiece.
You must be logged in to post a comment.