Connect with us

Movie Reviews

In Tennis, Love Means Zero: “Challengers” Is A Sexy, Sporty Love Triangle Without Much Love

Published

on

In Tennis, Love Means Zero: “Challengers” Is A Sexy, Sporty Love Triangle Without Much Love
I’ll watch anything with Zendaya in it. Even without the genius-level marketing that was the Challengers press tour — complete with those tennis ball Loewe heels — I still would’ve rushed to the theater to watch Challengers. Due to last year’s strike, its delayed release made one thing obvious: anticipation really does make the reward that much sweeter. Challengers finally comes out on Friday, April 26th and after watching an early screening, I can confirm, it’s well worth the wait.

What is Challengers about?

Challengers is about tennis. Challengers is about a love triangle. Challengers is about Zendaya’s bob. Directed by Luca Guadagnino of Call Me By Your Name, it’s no surprise that this movie is also about sex. It follows three young tennis players — two lifelong friends who are rising stars and superstar prodigy Tashi Duncan with whom they are massively enamored — over their messy love lives and careers.

Zendaya leads as Tashi Duncan, the intense and intensely ambitious woman at the center of this story. After a devastating injury, Tashi goes from the top of the game to her husband’s coach, trying to recall what she felt at the height of her career.

Ambition battles desire as the love story between the three twists and turns over the course of time. Shifting between time periods and storylines, it feels like a Christopher Nolan film if it slayed. And with Luca’s expert directorial eye, styling from JW Anderson’s Loewe, and Zendaya as heroine, it’s a cinematic feat — tense, vivid, and utterly irresistible. Zendaya herself recommends watching the movie at least three times while “viewing” it from each character’s perspective each time. Well, what Z says, goes.

Clearly, Mike Faist (Dear Evan Hansen, West Side Story) as Art and Josh O’Connor (The Crown, God’s Own Country) as Patrick have been inducted into the exclusive club of Luca’s muses. If you weren’t in love with them before, you will be by the movie’s end. The film has confirmed them as the white boys of the month. But they’re more than just pretty faces. They are Actors — with a capital A.

Advertisement

And Challengers is their launch pad for Hollywood’s latest leading men. Their performances are masterful, their characters are tight and consistent, and their chemistry is unmatched.

While their chemistry with Zendaya is electric, it’s their chemistry together that keeps the film pulsing with anticipatory tension. Whether they love each other or hate each other, the best scenes are those when Faist and O’Connor can play off each other — whether it’s literally tennis or a battle of wits and the battle for Zendaya’s heart.

Of course: we have to talk about that scene. Teased in the trailer and the promo images alike, everyone is all aflutter over the film’s alleged menage a trois. Appearing early on, it’s a taste of what the film does well: emphasizes sex appeal without denigrating any of its characters — especially Zendaya — as mere sexual objects.

Sex in this film is often implied. Yet, sensuality and the power exchange of desire are foregrounded. It’s about power. But it’s also a game. And, like tennis, Zendaya is a master. “You don’t know what tennis is,” she tells Art and Patrick. “It’s a relationship.” For the three of them, this certainly proves true. The central question here is: who will win?

Advertisement

This is a movie about tennis, actually.

The internet has noticed a strange trend: the women who’ve played Spiderman’s love interest in the major Spiderman franchises have all gone on to do movies about tennis. Kirsten Dunst did the underrated rom-com Wimbledon. Emma Stone portrayed Billie Jean King in Battle of the Sexes just three years after her term as Gwen Stacey. And now, Zendaya is playing her own version of a tennis star.

@jessthereporter The Spider-Man to Tennis pipeline – EXPLAINED #spiderman #challengers #zendaya #emmastone #kirstendunst #movienews #movietok ♬ original sound – Jess Lucero❤️🔥☕️

But this isn’t just a film about tennis players. It’s a movie deeply in love with the game of tennis itself. It plays with the form of the game by mirroring a tennis match — each act of the film feels like a set of a match. It moves through scenes and time periods like perfect volleys. The key scene that ties it all together is a tennis match. We watch the ball go back and forth as we are transported to and from the past, wondering which player will get the upper hand.

“What do you want?” The boys ask Tashi early in the film. “To watch some good fucking tennis,” she says.

In the end, the sentiment is repeated. In tennis, love means zero. And that’s the Challengers’ conceit. Sitting across from the umpire (who is — fun fact — played by her real-life assistant Darnell Appling) in the central tennis scene, her judgment is all. It’s like the final scene of Love and Basketball — they’re playing for her heart. And her heart is always with the game.

Challengers will make a tennis fan of you. While you don’t need to know the game in order to follow the plot, its artistic representation of the game — from the writing to the directorial shot list — will satisfy the superfans and intrigue the newbies.

Let’s get to the point (pun intended): Is Zendaya’s Tashi a triumph?

Earlier this year, Timothee Chalamet achieved the impressive feat of starring in two of the year’s highest-grossing films — Dune: Part Two and Wonka. I predict that by the time they stop this weekend’s Box Office count, Zendaya will achieve the same feat with Dune: Part Two and Challengers.

Advertisement

While she’s the heart of Dune: Part Two, she’s finally taking her rightful place as a leading lady with her turn as Tashi Duncan. After playing high schoolers for decades from Spider-Man to Euphoria, the role of Tashi is the perfect transition. We meet Tashi the summer after high school, before she heads to Stanford, and watch her grow into an adult in real-time. Zendaya and her character get similar arcs.

Zendaya deftly handles Tashi’s youthful confidence with her jaded older self while rocking that damn bob. It’s up to you to decide whether you love this character or despise her. There’s a viral interview in which an interviewer remarks that as much as he loves Zendaya, this character kind of made him hate her. Meanwhile, I — lover of maneaters and female manipulators — am pinning photos of Tashi to my vision board as we speak.

Audiences are split on their takes on Tashi but everyone agrees: Zendaya played her with the chill-inducing complexity she deserves. EGOT soon! This is Zendaya’s magnum opus — so far. She’s proven she’s a movie star, a leading lady, and an adult woman ready to play older roles. I can’t wait for what she does next.

Challengers will hit theaters on Friday, April 26th. Watch the full trailer here:

Advertisement

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

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

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

Published

on

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

That’s both a promise and a challenge she delivers, since what follows may rub some viewers the wrong way. Yet Gyllenhaal’s full-throttle commitment to her vision is compelling in and of itself, and she has marshalled an absolutely smashing-looking and -sounding production. The story proper begins in 1936 Chicago, which, like everything and everyplace else in the movie, has been luminously shot by cinematographer Lawrence Sher and sumptuously conjured by production designer Karen Murphy. Her involvement is appropriate given that her previous credits include Bradley Cooper’s A STAR IS BORN and Baz Luhrmann’s ELVIS, since among other things, THE BRIDE! is a nostalgic musical. Its Frankenstein (Christian Bale), who has taken the name of his maker, is obsessed with big-screen tuners, and imagines himself in elaborate song-and-dance numbers. (Considering the reception to JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX, one must applaud the daring of Warner Bros. for greenlighting another expensive film in which a tormented protagonist has that kind of fantasy life.)

THE BRIDE! may be revisionist on many levels, but its characterization of its “monster” holds true to past screen incarnations from Karloff’s to Elordi’s: His scarred appearance masks a lonely soul who desires companionship. Frankenstein has arrived in Chicago to seek out Dr. Cornelia Euphronious (Annette Bening), correctly believing she has the scientific know-how to create an appropriate mate for him. Rather than piece one together, Dr. Euphronious resurrects the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), whose consorting with underworld types led to her brutal death. Previously chafing against the man’s world she inhabited in life, she becomes even more defiant and unruly as a revenant, apparently possessed by the spirit of Shelley herself, declaiming in free-associative sentences and quoting rebellious literature.

Buckley, currently an Oscar favorite for her very different literary-inspired role in HAMNET, tears into the role of the Bride (who now goes by the name Penny) with invigorating abandon that bursts off the screen. Unsure of her identity yet overflowing with self-confident bravado, she’s the opposite of the sensitive “Frank,” but they’re united by the world that stands against them. That becomes literal when a violent incident sends them on the lam, road-tripping to New York City and beyond, on a trail inspired by the films of Ronnie Reed (Jake Gyllenhaal), Frank’s favorite song-and-dance-man star.

With THE BRIDE!, Gyllenhaal has made a film that’s at once her very own and a feverish homage to all sorts of cinema past and present. It’s a horror story, a lovers-on-the-run movie, a crime thriller, a musical and more, and historical fealty be damned if it makes for a good scene (as when Penny and Frank sneak into a 3D movie over a decade before such features became popular). In-references are everywhere: It might just be a coincidence that the couple’s travels take them past Fredonia, NY (cf. “Freedonia” in the Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP), but it’s certainly no accident that the former Ida is targeted by a crime boss named Lupino, referencing the actress and pioneering filmmaker whose works included noirs and women’s-issues stories. Penny’s exploits lead legions of admiring women to adopt her look and anarchic attitude, echoing the first JOKER (while a headline calls them “Twisted Sisters”), and the use of one Irving Berlin song in a Frankensteinian context immediately recalls a classic comedic take on the property.

Whether the audience should be put in mind of a spoof at a key point in a film with different goals is another matter. At times like these, Gyllenhaal’s pastiche ambitions overtake emotional investment in the story. As strong as the two lead performances are (Bale is quite moving, conveying a great deal of soul from behind his extensive prosthetics), it’s easier to feel for them in individual scenes than during the entire course of the just-over-two-hour running time. The diversions can be entertaining, to be sure, but they also result in an uncertainty of tone. The dissonance continues straight through to the end, where the filmmaker’s choice of closing-credits song once again suggests we’re not supposed to take all this too seriously.

Advertisement

There’s nonetheless much to admire and enjoy about THE BRIDE!, and this kind of risk-taking by a major studio is always to be encouraged (especially considering that we’ll see how long that lasts at Warner Bros. once Paramount takes it over). Beyond the terrific work by the aforementioned actors, there’s fine support from Peter Sarsgaard and Penelope Cruz as detectives on Penny and Frank’s heels, with Sandy Powell’s lavish costumes and Hildur Guðnadóttir’s rich, varied score vital to fashioning this fully imagined world. Kudos also to makeup and prosthetics designer Nadia Stacey and to Chris Gallaher and Scott Stoddard, who did those honors on Frank, for their visceral, evocative work. Uneven as it may be, THE BRIDE! is also as alive! as any film you’ll likely see this year.

Continue Reading

Trending