Connect with us

Entertainment

'A Family Affair' is a rom-com 'dream scenario' for Nicole Kidman, Zac Efron and Joey King

Published

on

'A Family Affair' is a rom-com 'dream scenario' for Nicole Kidman, Zac Efron and Joey King

Nicole Kidman was yearning to make a romantic comedy.

The Oscar winner wanted to shift course after playing a tragically depressed housewife in the miniseries “Expats” on Prime Video. She wanted to have a good time. She wanted Hollywood, for once, to send a rom-com script her way.

When she received the screenplay for “A Family Affair,” Kidman leapt at the opportunity to shed her dramatic persona and take on lighter material. In the Netflix film, premiering Friday, she channels Brooke Harwood, a widowed mom and award-winning memoirist with writer’s block. Brooke’s 24-year-old daughter, Zara (Joey King), still lives at home while working her thankless day job as an overworked personal assistant to Chris Cole (Zac Efron), a vain and insecure movie star who threatens to fire her over the slightest mistakes.

One afternoon, Brooke unexpectedly encounters Chris, who’s 16 years her junior, and the physical attraction is instantaneous. It eventually blooms into real love, angering Zara; she worries that Chris will break Brooke’s heart just as he has with past exes. But Brooke is not just any woman. She’s got wisdom that comes with age, and Chris’ global fame as the star of a superhero franchise means nothing to her. Instead, she sees the playful, loving man within him. And he truly values her, body and soul, and gives her something to write about again. (Is it getting hot in here?)

In “A Family Affair,” Zac Efron plays Chris Cole, a movie star who falls for Nicole Kidman’s Brooke Harwood, the mother of his assistant.

Advertisement

(Tina Rowden/Netflix)

Kidman, 57, and Efron, 36, previously played lovers in 2012’s “The Paperboy,” a gritty melodrama that has an extremely different ending. They were eager to reunite, this time in a joke-filled romance where the stakes are less life-and-death and more existential. The age-old question — What am I doing with my life? — reverberates throughout the film.

The Times recently spoke with Kidman, Efron and King to discuss the joys and taboos of filming a rom-com that pairs an older woman and younger man — a dynamic that continues to stoke public interest, and sometimes contempt. Kidman, as usual, was up for the challenge, and Efron found that irresistible. This conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

I watch a lot of romantic comedies, and this one stands out as a happy marriage of casting and writing. How did Carrie Solomon’s screenplay get into your hands?

Advertisement

Kidman: It was just one of those things where it was sent to me and I read it and I went, “Yeah, I have to do something that is fun and funny and completely different.” Because I’d been through “Expats” — you know, the trajectory of my career has always led me more towards drama. I was like, “Please, I’m begging to have some fun and to be considered for some sort of romantic comedy at some point.” So, this came to me, and I was like, “Yes, please, please, please.” Because I never get offered them. I never get considered.

Efron: I think there was something specific about the characters that I felt there was a natural inroad to them. I could understand Chris on some levels and what he was going through, and that was just exciting to think about playing that for me. Then, of course, at that point Nicole was involved — and I dream of working with Nicole — and Joey was also in talks for It. That was just a dream scenario for a rom-com.

Kidman: Joey is so funny. It was that kind of thing [where] you’re going, “OK, great. There’s this young girl who can come in and just nail it.”

Efron: Initially the script was called — can I say that?

King: Yeah, say it. We’re [with] the L.A. Times.

Advertisement

Kidman: It had a different title.

Efron: It had a different title, which made it really exciting to read. It was called “Motherf—.” As soon as you get that script — when it says that on the front — you can’t help but want to read it.

Nicole and Joey, yours is not a typical mother-daughter story. At times, the roles reverse, and Zara occupies the position of overprotective parent — in this case wanting to keep Brooke away from Chris. How did it feel to channel that?

King: One of the most truthful and realistic parts about this, which I really love, is that particular moment when a child, no matter how old they are, realizes that their parent is a person, not just their parent. [Zara] needs to learn to grow up a bit, and Brooke’s trying to teach her and help her make her own decisions. Zara wants to be an adult but [is] still stuck in this child role. I think they both really see each other for the first time in terms of, “You’re not just my parent. You’re a real woman who has womanly desires and I need to grow up. I’m not just a kid.” That transition is really, deeply uncomfortable for them and they have a lot of tension and they’re fighting, and Chris is caught in the middle of that tension.

Kidman: There’s an enormous amount of love, too. They like hanging out together. … We watch TV together, we eat together, we watch shows together. There’s that sort of gap that I have that I’ve now filled with her, so at some point I have to let her go.

Advertisement
Zara standing in the kitchen looking at her mom who is seated.

Joey King, left, says the one of the most truthful moments of the film is “when a child, no matter how old they are, realizes that their parent is a person, not just their parent.”

(Tina Rowden/Netflix)

Zac, you pull a Tom Hanks in “You’ve Got Mail.” You take a guy with villain qualities and make him worth rooting for. How did you connect with Chris?

Efron: I can relate to Chris in a number of ways, but it was fun to … dive into different emotions and things that [make me] feel for him. He’s struggling. He’s not handling it the best. … I think he’s honestly trying his best and it’s just hard. He’s taking it out probably in a way he doesn’t mean to be, but it’s very abrasive toward his assistant. [Then] he meets Brooke, who he doesn’t have to really pretend to be anything but himself around.

Nicole and Zac, you both starred in “The Paperboy.” Zac’s character was hopelessly in love with Nicole’s, who in turn was hopelessly in love with a convicted felon (John Cusack). How was it reuniting 12 years later — for a rom-com?

Advertisement

Efron: The tone of [“The Paperboy”] is very different, but I think the building blocks of our characters were there for [“A Family Affair], and that was kind of an unrequited love. We didn’t really get to take it the whole way and this really felt like we could draw a lot from that experience and take it to a whole new level. And it was easy. It felt really natural.

Kidman: We’re very easy with each other. I mean, part of the thing was going, ”If you’re doing this, I’ll do it [with you].” We wanted to do it together. I know how funny he is and he’s also just brave. Actually, with the comedy and stuff, he was like, “OK, let’s try this. We’ll try that.” It was just “anything goes.” … I just wanted to be able to be with a group of people who weren’t going to take everything so seriously. That allowed us [to] just play. Because a lot of it is play.

The scene when Zara discovers Chris and Brooke in bed, then hits her head in horror, is a brilliant bit of physical comedy. How many takes did that require?

Kidman [motioning toward King]: The perfectionist here kept asking to do it again and again and again.

King: When I’m doing anything that has any kind of stunt work in it, I like to watch [the] playback to see if I’m selling it enough. The head bump looked fake for the first three or four takes, so I probably did six or seven or eight.

Advertisement

Kidman: More than that. Maybe 20, 15? She’s like, “I’ll do it again!” We’re like, “Don’t hurt yourself.”

King: The two of them were so funny and supportive. They were getting such a kick out of it. They were off camera and they stayed to watch me.

Efron: It was so entertaining, we had to stay. Like, you were doing it 100%. There were no sound effects for you hitting your head. … It was some serious Jim Carrey vibes.

Kidman: Lucille Ball.

A man sitting at a dining table holds the hand of a woman seated next to him.

Zac Efron and Nicole Kidman reunited for “A Family Affair” after co-starring in 2012’s “The Paperboy.”

(Netflix)

Advertisement

Like “The Idea of You,” “A Family Affair” is a lighthearted romance pairing an older woman and a younger man, a trope that society still treats with suspicion. Why are stories like this important to tell?

Kidman: I mean, I can only say I’m glad the whole landscape is changing, and it shouldn’t be an anomaly. … We’ve had an abundance of older men and younger women, but we haven’t had the abundance of older women with younger men. And why not? … [“A Family Affair”] was written by [Solomon], who went in and [said], “This is what I want to tell. This is the story I want to tell.” Now we’re going to start to see the effects of the work that has been done for the last five, 10 years where we’re still trying to change the storytelling landscape and put women in places of power so they can tell these stories — whether they be comedies, whether they be dramas, whether they be thrillers, whatever they are. We just haven’t had the equivalent that we’ve had with the male gaze.

Efron: We want more of it. We need more of it.

Kidman: And we’re lucky to have guys like Zac who will go, “Yeah, I’m up for it. Let’s go.”

Advertisement

Efron: Yeah, it works out great for me. I’m like —

King: “Yes!”

Filmmakers have told me that they have a hard time persuading actors to star in romantic comedies. Why is that often the case?

King: I think maybe some people don’t do [them] because they’re afraid of not being taken seriously as a serious actor. … People who are able to [act in] very different genres, I think it’s actually the biggest flex that you can have in terms of showing the range that you have. Look at Zac. He was training for “Iron Claw while making “A Family Affair.” … What a flex.

Efron: It’s important. You really want to, I think, be able to at least try everything.

Advertisement

King: Comedy’s fun! Comedy’s fun and comedy’s hard. Comedy’s really hard.

Can comedy be harder than drama?

King: It can be.

Kidman: It depends who’s at the helm. It depends on the chemistry.

Efron: If you can bring it to a place where it’s real, it kind of feels oddly similar to a drama.

Advertisement

Kidman: They always say it’s such a fine [line], especially when you’re doing a drama, you can move very, very quickly into satire or comedy. … In that sense, it’s almost like with drama: You’ve got to go, “No, no, stay here in the present moment.” Because if we start to ridicule it, it can move into that place very quickly and then it’s hard to move back.

King: It’s hard, and it’s easier when you have a creative team that’s supportive and the actors you’re working with are super-nonjudgmental. We’re all sitting there while each of us takes these crazy swings in terms of improv and risky swings. Some of them don’t work, but I don’t feel embarrassed. … It’s still a difficult thing to get right sometimes, but you don’t feel like there’s any limitations on what you can do when you’ve got really great people to work with.

A woman stands near a grocery counter with a shopping basket, looking at a man.

Yes, the stars go to the grocery store. Zara (Joey King), left, takes Chris (Zac Efron) shopping.

(Aaron Epstein/Netflix)

In the film, it’s revealed that Chris has not shopped at a grocery store since becoming mega-famous. Can any of you relate?

Advertisement

King: No, I can’t. I go to the grocery store all the time.

Kidman: I have teenage girls. We go to the grocery store because everybody wants something different.

King [to Kidman]: Do you find it hard to go to the grocery store, though? Just because everyone knows who you are?

Kidman: No. I put a cap on … and I hold my head high, and we go in there.

King: I love the grocery store.

Advertisement

Kidman: I have to say it’s kind of fun and relaxing.

King: Some people find the grocery store very anxiety-inducing, but I actually find it really lovely. I think it’s so fun, especially because usually I’m going to make something that I’m excited to make.

Chris asks Zara to buy him strawberry-flavored Oreos. Zac, what’s your go-to snack?

Kidman [to Efron]: You’re a great snacker because [you’re] very healthy.

Efron: I’ve been eating super-clean lately.

Advertisement

King: I got him these protein Pop-Tarts as part of his wrap gift.

Efron: It was the sweetest thing I’d had in months and it was so good. … I think I had them all in one sitting.

Movie Reviews

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

Published

on

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

The satirical romp Josie and the Pussycats (2001) is a fun movie. But is it a great rock ‘n’ roll movie?
Eh, not so fast on that second one. Welcome back to Glide’s quest for what makes a good rock ‘n’ roll movie. Last month, we looked at Almost Famous, a great launching pad because it gets so much right. And every first Friday, we’ll take another look at a rock ‘n’ movie and ask what it means in the larger pantheon. This month, the Glide’s screening room brings you Josie and the Pussycahttps://glidemagazine.com/322100/almost-perfect-why-almost-famous-sets-the-gold-standard-for-rock-movies/ts. The film is a live-action take on the classic comic-and-cartoon property of a sugary, all-girl rock trio that exists in the world of Riverdale, a.k.a. fictional home of the iconic Archie Andrews.

But this Josie has next to nothing to do with Riverdale and is instead a satire of consumerism and ’00s boy bands. A worthy target, and a topic that has stayed worthy in the quarter-century since Josie dropped. The film was not a hit, but it has become something of a cult classic (like many movies featured in this series).

The plot is fairly simple. Wyatt Frame, an evil corporate type, is making piles of money off boy band Du Jour. They start to wise up to his evil scheme and have to be… taken care of. Frame needs a new group to front his plot, which revolves around mind control to push consumer culture. Enter Josie and the Pussycats, who are about to have a whirlwind ride to the top. And along the way, foil a plot with tentacles so far-reaching they have ensnared… Carson Daly?

Josie is a fun, clever movie, but it doesn’t have a whole lot to say about real rock ‘n’ roll, unless you want to simply accept a perspective that it’s just another cynical consumer-driven product. Even that is an argument that can be made, as long as you’re willing to ignore underground and indie scenes and passionate artists making amazing music.

And it is true that this is a theme of Josie. The band triumphs at the end via their authentic music. But it somehow doesn’t feel authentic, which makes it something of a hollow victory. Let’s consider the criteria already established for a good rock ‘n’ roll movie, and how Josie delivers on that front. The first is in the characters department. The film dodges the previously established Buckethead Paradox, which states that “The real-life rock stars are so much larger than life that you can’t make up credible fictional versions. There is no way someone like Buckethead would come out of a writer’s room and make it to a screen.”

Advertisement

For better or worse, Josie dodges the Paradox by essentially embracing it. The characters themselves are cartoons, and there’s no effort at realism. Given that intent is a huge part of art, it seems unfair to call these characters “cartoons” as a criticism, and it should probably be a compliment. At the same time, they aren’t particularly memorable, which is not a great quality.

And—as a bonus—Tara Reid is perfectly cast as drummer Melody Valentine. Josie was a few years after her turn in Around the Fire (1998), an unintentionally hilarious classic that plays like a jam band afterschool special from the producers of Reefer Madness (look for this amazing film in an upcoming piece).
The acting in general is good, with Rachel Leigh Cook as Josie McCoy and Rosario Dawson as bassist Valerie Brown rounding out the band. And Alan Cumming almost steals the show as sleazy corporate weasel Wyatt Frame.

The character of Wyatt is the film’s funniest riff on a rock ‘n’ roll archetype: the sleazy, corporate manager accompanied by assorted crooked accountants. From Colonel Tom Parker to Albert Grossman to The Great Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle. It’s all about the benjamins. Which is where the music comes in. If the music is good, that’s what makes it worth it. And Josie’s music has aged particularly well. It’s well-recorded, produced and executed. The songs are particularly catchy. The vocals are by Kay Hanley of Letters to Cleo. Much of the soundtrack sounds like a lost album from The Muffs, and one wonders why Kim Shattuck wasn’t involved.

There’s an argument that power pop was never supposed to be dangerous, and that the Muffs aren’t dangerous either. Fair on the surface, but they played real punk clubs and came from a real scene. There’s not even a hint of that in Josie. So an argument that they play pop punk (which they kinda do) is really lacking the punk part.
And it was produced by Babyface, of all people. While that doesn’t seem like it should lead to great rock ‘n’ roll, sometimes preconceptions are wrong.

That said, this is a very commercial product and sound—as catchy as it is—so maybe it’s not a misconception. Maybe the right question to ask is whether it’s all too perfect? And that’s what gives this ostensibly rock ‘n’ film a smoothed-down edge? After all, the basic ingredients are there. But part of what makes good rock good is that it feels actually dangerous. Maybe there are some actual subversive messages, or a genuine counterculture scene. And Josie simply isn’t that film. The soundtrack is fondly remembered enough that Hanley appeared live and performed the songs at a screening in 2017. That appearance also included the film’s stars Cook, Dawson and Reid.

Advertisement

It’s worth noting that while Cook and company obviously lip sync to the songs in the film, their performances are credible. They went through instrument boot camp, so they pull off the parts.

In the end, the film is primarily a satire of consumer culture. And even more strangely, is loaded with actual product placement. Clearly, the joke was intended to “hit harder” with real products, but having Target in the film constantly makes it feel like more of what it is parodying than a parody. Where’s the joke if the viewer actually pushes to shop at Target while watching the film? And if the filmmakers actually took money (which they almost certainly did)?

And perhaps that is the lesson for this month: a great rock ‘n’ roll movie needs to have something to say about the larger meaning or culture of the music. And while Josie may have a lot to say about culture in general, and it may say it in a fun and likeable way, it’s just not very rock ‘n’ roll. There’s no grit. Now, does it have some things to say about being in a band? Yes, though they are arguably true of most collaborations.

If someone in a hundred years wanted to understand early 21st century rock, Josie and the Pussycats is a bad choice. It doesn’t show the sweat of a performance or the smell of beer. But it’s a great choice for anyone looking for a light-hearted, fun watch with a great soundtrack. We could all use some sugar in our lives these days.
Join us again next month, when we’ll look at one of the inspirations for Josie, A Hard Day’s Night, the legendary first film from The Beatles

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Entertainment

Commentary: As ‘The Pitt’ suffers a digital meltdown, a human with analog experience saves the day

Published

on

Commentary: As ‘The Pitt’ suffers a digital meltdown, a human with analog experience saves the day

This article contains spoilers for Season 2, Episode 9 of “The Pitt.”

Midway through Season 2, “The Pitt” has taken on the perils of the digital age and given me a reason to love the show as much as everyone else does.

Don’t get me wrong — I understand perfectly why so many people, including recent Emmy and Golden Globe voters, have lost their minds over the HBO Max medical drama: The propulsive day-in-the-life of a Pittsburgh ER conceit, the dazzling ensemble cast, the writers’ heroic attempts to showcase our perilously broken healthcare system, the healing power of empathy and, of course, the Noah Wyle-ness of it all. His brilliant and gentle-voiced Dr. Michael “Robby” Robinavitch is as aspirational a character on television as we’ve ever seen.

But having recently spent almost six hours passing out and vomiting from pain in the waiting room of my local ER (which was empty except for one other man), while being told there was nothing anyone could do until the next shift arrived, I confess I have watched “The Pitt” with a jaundiced eye. The regular crowd shots of the waiting room too often reduce the afflicted into a zombie-like horde bent on making life more difficult for our beloved medical staff.

Sure it’s tough to work in an ER when you are worried about your mother’s expectations, grieving your dead mentor, struggling with addiction or worrying about your sister, but no doubt many of those in the waiting room are experiencing similar issues while also in terrifying and hideous pain.

Advertisement

I’m just saying.

In this second season, however, “The Pitt” gave me reason to cheer. It chronicles the day before Robby is set to leave on a three-month sabbatical, and in the early hours, we meet his temporary replacement, Dr. Baran Al-Hashimi (Sepideh Moafi). Having already attempted to force those suffering in waiting rooms to create their own “patient portals,” Dr. Al-Hashimi goes on to advocate for an AI-supported system to aid the doctors with pesky paper work.

Robby, of course, does not think any of this is a good idea and since he is always right (and no television writer is going to openly promote AI), her plan backfires almost immediately. First, with a medical notes transcription that gets Very Important words wrong and then after a complete digital blackout.

After a nearby hospital is hacked and ransomed, the higher-ups decide to defend its system by shutting it down, which means business must be conducted in the old-fashioned, paper-and-clipboards way.

The result is chaos, and a few too many jokes about young people not knowing how to work a fax machine or manage paper. Some of the more seasoned staff, including and especially the indefatigable charge nurse Dana Evans (Katherine LaNasa), remember the days before everyone carried an iPad well enough to keep things moving. Even so, Dana wisely calls upon the services of “retired” clerk Monica Peters (Rusty Schwimmer).

Advertisement

When the computer system at the Pitt is shut down, Dana (Katherine LaNasa), center, calls in Monica (Rusty Schwimmer), far right, who arrives to help.

(Warrick Page / HBO Max)

“Laid off by the digital revolution, not retired,” Monica corrects her. “And how’s all this digital s— working out for you now?”

This is where I cheered. I love the digital world as much as the next person currently typing on a computer to file a story that I have discussed with my editors on Slack and that I will not see in hard copy until it appears in the physical paper. But like pretty much everyone, I have suffered all manner of digital breakdowns and mix-ups, not to mention the inevitably increased workload that comes with the perception that I can do the work of previous multitudes with a few additional strokes of a keypad.

Advertisement

Except, of course, that’s a lie — a keypad is capable of nothing on its own. Neither are fingers, for that matter. They must be manipulated by someone whose brain has to figure out and execute whatever needs to be done. This requires an ability to navigate the ever-changing tech systems that store and distribute information (often in ways that are not at all intuitive) while also understanding the essentials of the actual work being done.

In “The Pitt,” that is the emergency medical treatment of human beings, which requires all manner of physical tasks. As this storyline makes clear, many of the medical staff do not quite understand how to order or handle these tasks without a screen to guide them.

Hence the need for Monica, representative of a large number of support workers who do understand because it was once their job to keep everything moving, to answer all manner of questions, prioritize what needs to be fast-tracked and make sure nothing falls through the cracks while also engaging with all and sundry on a human level.

The shutdown is obviously an attempt to underline the limits of AI but it also serves as a fine and necessary reminder of how readily we have surrendered people like Monica, with their knowledge and experience, to keyboards and touch pads (which, of course, don’t require salaries, benefits or lunch breaks).

But — and this is important — computers are tools not workers. Alas, that has not kept companies in virtually every industry from drastically cutting back on trained and experienced employees and handing large portions of their work (mental if not physical) to people, in this case doctors and nurses, who already have demanding jobs of their own.

Advertisement

But hey, you get a company iPad!

A woman in blue scrubs stands in front of a white board looking at a woman in a mauve jacket holding a clipboard.

Nurse Dana (Katherine LaNasa), left, and Dr. Baran Al-Hashimi (Sepideh Moafi) have to resort to paper, clipboards and white boards to keep track of patients after the hospital’s systems are shut down.

(Warrick Page / HBO Max)

Often, including with those patient portals, what was once paid labor lands in the lap of the consumers, who in “The Pitt” are people sitting in an emergency room and likely not at the top of their game when it comes to filling out forms about their medical history or coming up with a unique password.

ER dramas, like the “The Pitt,” are inevitably fueled by the tension between the demands for speed and the need for humane care, something that is increasingly true, if not as intrinsically necessary, in all facets of our culture.

Advertisement

With computers in our pockets, we now expect everything to be available instantly. But when something in our online experience goes wrong, we need an actual human to help us fix it. Unfortunately, as the overwhelmed staff of the Pitt discover, those people are increasingly difficult to find because they have been laid off — even nurse Dana can’t do everything!

Dr. Al-Hashimi, like many, believes that patient portals and AI-assisted medical notes will save time, allowing the doctors and nurses to spend more of that precious commodity with their patients. But, as Dr. Robby and Dana repeatedly argue, what they really need is more staff.

There’s no point in saving a few minutes at the admittance window, or on an app, if you are then going to have to spend hours waiting for or trying to find someone who can actually help you when you need it.

That is certainly true in the medical sector, where digital technology has done little to eradicate long wait times for medical appointments or in emergency rooms. Being treated in a hospital hallway by people who can barely stop to talk to you is not an uncommon occurrence for many Americans. The U.S. is facing a critical shortage in hospital staff, with the ranks of registered nurses and other medical personnel having plummeted post-pandemic, often due to burn out.

The amount of time the staff of “The Pitt” spend with each patient, while dramatically satisfying, is almost as aspirational as the wisdom and goodness of Dr. Robby.

Advertisement

None of these problems is going to be solved by AI or any other “time-saving” device. We have not, as far as I know, figured out a way to extend an hour beyond 60 minutes or modified the human body so that it does not require seven to nine hours of sleep each night.

Medical institutions aside, I can’t think of any place I have visited lately that wouldn’t have benefited from more paid and experienced workers, especially those who know how to do things when computers glitch or fail.

The minute Monica sits down and starts barking orders in the ER, everyone feels much better. Here is someone who understands what needs to be done, why, and how to make it happen. Moreover, she has eyes, ears, hands and human experience enough to know that, in the end, people are less interested in saving time than getting the care they need.

In the ER and everywhere else.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

Published

on

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

After six TV series from 2013 to 2022, which caused a worrying surge in flat cap-wearing among well-to-do men in country pubs, Peaky Blinders is now getting a hefty standalone feature film, a muscular picture swamped in mud and blood. This is the movie version of Steven Knight’s global small-screen hit, based on the real-life gangs that swaggered through Birmingham from Victorian times until well into the 20th century. Cillian Murphy returns with his uniquely unsettling, almost sightless stare as Tommy Shelby, family chieftain of a Romani-traveller gang, a man who has converted his trauma in the trenches of the first world war into a ruthless determination to survive and rule.

As we join the story some years after the curtain last came down, it is 1940, Britain’s darkest hour and Tommy is the crime-lion in winter. He now lives in a huge, remote mansion, far from the Birmingham crime scene he did so much to create, alone except for his henchman Johnny Dogs, played by Packy Lee. Evidently wearied and sickened by it all, Tommy is haunted by his ghosts and demons: memories of his late brother, Arthur, and dead daughter, Ruby, and working on what will be his definitive autobiography. (Sadly, we don’t get any scenes of Tommy having lunch with a drawling London publisher or agent.)

But a charismatic and beautiful woman, played by Rebecca Ferguson, brings Tommy news of what we already know: his malign idiot son Erasmus Shelby, played by Barry Keoghan, is now running the Peaky Blinders, a new gen-Z-style group of flatcappers raiding government armouries for guns that should really belong to the military. And if that wasn’t disloyal and unpatriotic enough, Erasmus has accepted a secret offer from a sinister Nazi fifth-columnist called Beckett, played by Tim Roth, to help distribute counterfeit currency which will destroy the economy and make Blighty easier to invade. Doesn’t Erasmus know what Adolf Hitler is going to do to his own Romani people? (To be fair to Erasmus, a lot of the poshest and most well-connected people in the land didn’t either.)

Clearly, Tommy is going to have to come down there and sort this mess out. And we get a very ripe scene in which soft-spoken Tommy turns up in the pub full of raucous idiots who cheek him. “Who the faaaaaack is ‘Tommy Shelby’?” sneers one lairy squaddie, who gets horribly schooled on that very subject.

Advertisement

In this movie, Tommy Shelby is against the Nazis, and he can’t get to be more of a good guy than that. (Tommy has evidently put behind him memories of Winston Churchill from the first two series, when Churchill was dead set on clamping down on the Peaky Blinders.) The war and the Nazis are a big theme for a big-screen treatment and screenwriter Knight and director Tom Harper put it across with some gusto as a kind of homefront war film, helped by their effortlessly watchable lead. Maybe you have to be fully invested in the TV show to really like it, although this canonisation of Tommy is a sentimental treatment of what we actually know of crime gangs in the second world war. Nevertheless, it is a resoundingly confident drama.

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man is in out on 6 March in the UK and US, and on Netflix from 20 March.

Continue Reading

Trending