Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘Joy’ Review: Thomasin McKenzie, James Norton and Bill Nighy Lift Netflix’s Pedestrian Drama About IVF-Pioneering Brits

Published

on

‘Joy’ Review: Thomasin McKenzie, James Norton and Bill Nighy Lift Netflix’s Pedestrian Drama About IVF-Pioneering Brits

It’s hard to build dramatic momentum out of scientists hunched over microscopes peering at petri dishes. Indeed, director Ben Taylor struggles to clear that hurdle in his conventional but watchable enough account of the development of what became known as in vitro fertilization. While it’s more compelling as human drama than science, the film benefits from timeliness, given right-wing efforts to curb women’s reproductive freedoms and recent moves by Senate Republicans to block a bill protecting the right to IVF. That factor, plus the very capable cast, should help Joy find an audience on Netflix, though anti-choice extremists won’t be among them.

If the production looks and sounds like a movie but plays more like dated television, the fault lies mainly with Jack Thorne’s by-the-numbers script. The writer takes Brit historical dramas like The Imitation Game as his model to map a breakthrough in 20th century medical science that gave hope to countless women unable to conceive a child. But the stodgy familiarity of the inspirational, based-on-a-true-story template gives Joy a halting rhythm that echoes the stop-start progress of the fertility treatment pioneers.

Joy

The Bottom Line

Test-tube baby story is fine for tube viewing.

Advertisement

Venue: BFI London Film Festival (Galas)
Release date: Friday, Nov. 22 (Netflix)
Cast: Thomasin McKenzie, James Norton, Bill Nighy, Joanna Scanlan, Tanya Moodie, Rish Shah, Charlie Murphy, Ella Bruccoleri, Dougie McMeekin
Director: Ben Taylor
Screenwriter: Jack Thorne

Rated PG-13,
1 hour 53 minutes

That team is formed when Jean Purdy (Thomasin McKenzie), a nurse and future embryologist, is hired as a lab manager in the Department of Physiology at Cambridge, working under Robert Edwards (James Norton). After making initial headway with the study of human fertilization in the late ‘60s, they take their findings to obstetrician and gynecologist Patrick Steptoe (Bill Nighy), at that time considered something of a pariah by the British medical establishment for his championing of laparoscopy.

Patrick is crotchety and dismissive of their overtures at first, but Bob and Jean talk him around with their passionate belief in the project and intriguing early research. They agree to set up operations in a disused wing of Oldham General Hospital, a four-hour drive from Cambridge. Patrick warns them they will have the Church, the state and the whole world against them. “But we’ll have the mothers,” counters Bob.

Advertisement

As work on the project inches forward, the three dissimilar personalities — along with Muriel (Tanya Moodie), the brisk, no-nonsense senior nurse who insists on being addressed by her job title of Matron — gradually build a harmonious professional relationship.

But the focus tightens on Jean as the central figure. A churchgoing Christian cut off by her loving mother Gladys (Joanna Scanlan) when she refuses to abandon the controversial work, Jean is revealed to have a personal investment in women’s fertility issues. This becomes especially relevant for her when her unintended romance with Cambridge lab colleague Arun (Rish Shah) gets serious and he proposes, making it clear he’s eager to start a family.

One of the more enjoyable parts of the movie is Jean’s rapport with the disparate group of women signing up for the experiment, who forge a sense of community during their hospital visits. Jean’s manner of dealing with them as she administers regular hormone injections is detached and clinical at first — much like her earlier consent to have sex with Arun, on the condition that he form no attachment.

When a member of the Ovum Club, as they’ve dubbed themselves, points out that Jean could stand to work on her people skills, she immediately softens, learning to put the women at ease. It’s through those interactions that Thorne’s screenplay shows deep compassion for the many childless women yearning for a baby, grounding the drama in basic human need as much as science. There’s poignancy also in the participants’ knowledge that most of them will not get pregnant, but that they are laying the groundwork for future mothers who will.

A heated scene in which the Medical Research Council declines to provide development funding, arguing that the research will benefit only a small handful of the population, underscores Jean, Bob and Patrick’s frustration as they try to make people grasp the concept of infertility as a treatable condition.

Advertisement

The one-step-forward, two-steps-back pattern of positive results followed by disappointment becomes a bit static. But after Jean learns that her still estranged mother is dying, she breaks with the group, dismissing their efforts as a failure and parting on bitter terms with Bob. That allows for the inevitable resumption of work when stinging loss galvanizes Jean back into action.

The final stretch leading up to the first successful “test-tube birth” in 1978, acquires welcome notes of suspense and emotional power — the latter amplified by text at the end of the film revealing that 12 million babies have been born thanks to IVF in the decades since. We also learn that Edwards, the last surviving member of the team, was awarded the Nobel Prize for their work in 2010.

Thorne frames the story with Bob’s letter, heard in voiceover, lobbying for the inclusion of Jean’s name on a plaque at the hospital honoring the IVF pioneers. What the script doesn’t address, somewhat mystifyingly, is the decades during which Purdy’s vital contribution went unacknowledged, no doubt due to her gender and the reductive view of her role as that of a mere lab technician.

The screenplay also fails to make much of the public hostility directed at the research team. The handful of press and protestors outside the hospital shouting “Dr. Frankenstein,” a bit of graffiti and one instance in which Jean is shown receiving a hate-mail package don’t exactly solidify the idea of a wall of opposition. A TV appearance in which Bob is shouted down by an angry studio audience is more effective.

Taylor, a seasoned TV director best known for the streaming series Catastrophe and Sex Education, does a competent job with his sharp-looking first feature, even if the narrative flow is erratic. The movie leans heavily on Steven Price’s score for dramatic weight and on a very random selection of ‘60s and ‘70s needle drops for energy. Only Nina Simone’s gorgeous cover of “Here Comes the Sun” over the opening credits makes thematic sense in terms of the story’s ultimate outcome.

Advertisement

Fortunately, the actors lift the material. McKenzie creates an appealing contrast between Jean’s mousy voice and her grit and forthrightness, shaded with an understated vein of melancholy. Nighy brings his usual economy of means to a veteran medical professional whose formality gives way to reveal his warm, caring nature; Patrick’s approaching retirement age incentivizes him to make a difference. Norton, nerded out with glasses and Michael Caine’s old hair, has the charm and sincerity necessary to put across Thorne’s frequently hackneyed declarations — “We’re making the impossible possible,” “Everything changes from here.”

Scanlan as Jean’s mum and Moodie as Matron both make strong impressions, though even those smaller roles are not entirely spared moments of speechifying. For instance, when Jean is distressed to learn that Patrick has been performing abortions at the hospital — which were legal by that time but still strongly opposed by the Church — Matron thunders back: “We are here to give women a choice. Every choice.”

Joy may not represent the height of sophisticated storytelling, but it has the advantage of an interesting story rescued from historical obscurity. It will touch the hearts of many parents whose lives have been changed — and in the case of their children, made possible — by those ten long years of dedication that led to the IVF breakthrough.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Better Man (2024) – Movie Review

Published

on

Better Man (2024) – Movie Review

Better Man, 2024.

Directed by Michael Gracey.
Starring Robbie Williams, Jonno Davies, Steve Pemberton, Damon Herriman, Raechelle Banno, Alison Steadman, Kate Mulvany, Frazer Hadfield, Tom Budge, Anthony Hayes, Jake Simmance, Jesse Hyde, Liam Head, Chase Vollenweider, Rose Flanagan, Jack Sherran, Karina Banno, Asmara Feik, Leo Harvey-Elledge, Elyssia Koulouris, Frazer Hadfield, Chris Gun, Ben Hall, Kaela Daffara, and Chase Vollenweider.

SYNOPSIS:

Follow Robbie Williams’ journey from childhood, to being the youngest member of chart-topping boyband Take That, through to his unparalleled achievements as a record-breaking solo artist – all the while confronting the challenges that stratospheric fame and success can bring.

Advertisement

During a conversation exploring the possibility of a biopic, British popstar Robbie Williams told well-regarded musical director Michael Gracey that he saw himself as a monkey performing for others. That became the window into telling the story of this singer/songwriter with Better Man, a film that, as the title implies, also shows that Robbie Williams is self-aware of his flaws, mistakes, and shortcomings without being afraid to put them front and center. Yes, rather than go through the arduous casting process, Michael Gracey ran with that comment literally, making the creative choice to have the pop star played by a CGI monkey (voiced by Jonno Davies, with Robbie Williams lending his vocals.)

It’s a smart move to roll a short clip of subject and filmmaker conversing before the film starts proper, not just because other parts of the world might not be familiar with Robbie Williamss music (consistently accidentally reading it as a biopic about musician Robin Williams if you’re anything like me), but also since this is such a bold concept for a biopic that it’s helpful to get an idea of what this man looks like and the personality he puts out there before it’s all monkey business.

Going one step further, this turns out to not fall into the trappings of a flailing gimmick but ties into themes of pressures of the music industry, fame causing stunted behavior, family drama, and an unflinching portrayal of self that doesn’t smooth over any rough edges. Better Man is an invigorating biopic; a shot of adrenaline to the most overplayed, clichéd genre. After this, no one should be allowed to make biopics (at least ones about musicians) unless they have an equally creative angle or some compelling X factor behind it. Simply put, this film puts most recent offerings from the genre to shame, especially the ones that get trotted out at the end of every year as familiar awards bait.

Even though the life trajectory and story beats aren’t anything new to anyone who has ever seen a biopic about a musician before, it gets to be told with boundless imagination, typically coming from several dazzling musical sequences. Not only are they dynamic in presentation (whether it be jubilantly unfolding across the streets of London or something more melancholy regarding fatherly abandonment), but they are sometimes highwire concepts themselves; Better Man has one of the most thrilling, fantastically clever, visually stunning, and exciting takes on battling one’s demons.

The characters (including Robbie’s family, friends, lover, hell, and even Oasis) don’t interact or react to Robbie Williams as a monkey. It’s a visual treat for us (this film would fall apart without the astonishingly expressive technical wizardry from Weta, who already have proven themselves as outstanding in this field when it comes to the recent Planet of the Apes movies) but another personal, self-deprecating, honest interpretation of how Robbie saw himself during these life stages. Initially, this feels like it will end up as a missed opportunity for further creativity or humor. One of the more surprising elements here is that the filmmakers (with Michael Gracey co-writing alongside Oliver Cole and Simon Gleeson) are playing this material straight and not going for laughs. That confidence pays off, allowing a maximalist, melodramatic side to come out with sincere, absorbing emotional heft.

Advertisement

That story follows a standard rise and fall structure, with Robbie Williams finding inspiration from his initially supportive singing father (Steve Pemberton), exhibiting a relatable drive to make his grandmother (Alison Steadman proud, getting his start in boy band Take That before his insecurities and worsening substance abuse and egocentric behavior gets him kicked out, stumbling into a rocky relationship with Nicole Appleton (Raechelle Banno), and then not only finding the courage to put some meaningful lyrics out into the world through a successful solo career but managing the anxieties that come with performing in front of humongous crowds while constantly struggling with drug addiction. 

Some of those aspects feel glossed over and aren’t as explored as they possibly could have been (the film is already 135 minutes, but some of it is given a broad strokes treatment), but it’s affecting anyway due to the creativity, artistry, musical numbers, and blunt honesty enhancing those character dynamics. Better Man is a biopic that starts with a confessional about being a narcissist and having a punchable face and ends up somewhere beautifully moving that perfectly captures the essence of that title. There is also a healthy dose of Frank Sinatra here, given that he was a major source of inspiration for Robbie Williams, so let’s say he and Michael Gracey did this biopic their way, and the result is something no one should want any other way.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★ ★

Robert Kojder is a member of the Chicago Film Critics Association and the Critics Choice Association. He is also the Flickering Myth Reviews Editor. Check here for new reviews, follow my Twitter or Letterboxd, or email me at MetalGearSolid719@gmail.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist

Advertisement

 

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review | 'Nosferatu'

Published

on

Movie Review | 'Nosferatu'

Robert Eggers’s take on the 1922 F.W. Murnau film “Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror” has long been a passion project for the director, in various stages of development since he broke out with 2015’s “The Witch.” Now that the film has finally made its way to screens, Eggers has the opportunity to shine. And like any of his films, “Nosferatu” has mood and style to spare.

Eggers’s movies always have great attention to detail, but sometimes the style can outweigh the story and “Nosferatu” is no different. “The Witch” was about setting a moody atmosphere and “The Northman” was about showing off the muscularity in his filmmaking and in between he made arguably his best movie, “The Lighthouse,” which is a bizarre, fever dream kind of experience.

In the first frames of “Nosferatu,” Ellen (Lily-Rose Depp) emerges from the shadows with tears running down her face. She is calling out to something, but nothing is there. What is making her body move in such unpleasant ways? Who is the mysterious voice calling out to her? From the shadows emerges a silhouette of Count Orlok (Bill Skarsgård), who is haunting Ellen.



Years later, Ellen is in a relationship with Thomas (Nicholas Hoult, who is having a busy year between “Nosferatu,” “Juror #2” and “The Order”). Thomas is heading to Transylvania to meet with Count Orlock, foreshadowing a great deal of dread in the movie. Back home,  Ellen is not doing well, constantly haunted by the looming presence of Count Orlock, who will not let her know peace.

Not only does Count Orlock hang over Ellen’s life, but his existence hangs over the entire movie. Eggers effectively uses the character sparingly, shooting him in shadows and only revealing his face every so often. It’s best to go into the movie surprised by the design, because Eggers certainly doesn’t settle for recreating the well-established imagery from the original film. Skarsgård, who is becoming a horror film regular, is nowhere to be found in his performance, completely disappearing behind the character.

Advertisement

Depp delivers the strongest performance of her young career, as she is required to run the gauntlet of emotional and physical pain. Her suffering helps bring some emotion to the movie, which can occasionally feel cold and distant in service of emphasizing the film’s craft. Individual moments of dread feel palpable, but the movie goes through plodding stretches (including with superfluous characters played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Emma Corrin; Eggers regular Willem Dafoe also plays a role), where the emotionality of Depp’s performance and the grim appearance of Skarsgård become sorely missed.

Even when the movie is choppy, it’s hard to not get lost in the impeccability of the craft. Egger and cinematographer Jarin Blaschke partially use natural lighting to establish the mood, while production designer Craig Lathrop transports viewers to 1838 Germany. Getting lost in the world of “Nosferatu” isn’t hard — though sometimes being moved by it as a whole is a tough task.

“Nosferatu” is currently playing in theaters.

Matt Passantino is a contributor to CITY.






Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Max’ movie review: A fiery Sudeep drives this high-octane action thriller

Published

on

‘Max’ movie review: A fiery Sudeep drives this high-octane action thriller

Sudeep in ‘Max’.
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

Inspector Arjun Mahakshay a.k.a Max takes charge unofficially a day before his suspension ends. A huge blunder inside the station puts Max against powerful men, who come for his life. As he is faced with the improbable task of saving his colleagues and coming out unscathed from the problem, the daring cop pauses to prepare a cup of tea.

Director Vijay Kartikeyaa’s debut project is driven by a protagonist who keeps you guessing about his next move. Even if Max aims to provide unhinged ‘masala’ entertainment, the movie’s leading man isn’t a one-note character. Since the events unfold during one night, and he has limited time to cross a series of hurdles, Max puts his sharp brain to quick use. And once he enters the risky zone of facing the criminals head-on, he unleashes the beast inside him.

Max (Kannada)

Director: Vijay Kartikeyaa

Cast: Sudeep, Varalaxmi Sarathkumar, Ilavarasu, Uggram Manju

Runtime: 132 minutes

Advertisement

Storyline: A day before reporting for duty after a two-month suspension, inspector Arjun Mahakshay faces an unexpected situation. Can he save the day?

Max is a celebration of Sudeep, who oozes style in his aggressive portrayal of an all-conquering officer. If you saw him as a subdued yet classy cop carrying a deep pain within him in Vikrant Rona (2022), Sudeep cuts loose in Max to cater to his fans, who were hungry for ‘mass’ moments involving their favourite star.

The one-man show is great fun to watch to an extent. Director Vijay scripts an old-school world where the hero emerges as the ultimate saviour of distressed people. However, as a whole, Max leaves you wanting more as you expect the protagonist to face the heat of a mighty antagonist.

Sunil, essaying the main villain, is undone by a toothless character. Varalaxmi Sarathkumar’s character of a cop with a negative shade shows promise early on but gets fizzled out eventually as she fails to make any difference to the plot. Right from the beginning, it’s apparent that both the characters are bracing for an inevitable onslaught from Max.  

It’s also quite shocking how Max has an almost incompetent team. When they aren’t blindly following the instructions from Max, the junior-level officers are scared and clueless. Ilavarasu, playing an experienced officer, delivers a measured performance. The rest of the cast, including Uggram Manju, Samyuktha Hornad, Sukrutha Wagale and Vijay Chendur, are too loud in their respective portrayals.

Advertisement

One can’t blame the actors as their characters are designed to artificially amp up the tension. With a highly dramatic plot in hand, the director’s decision to showcase stronger emotions than what’s necessary dents the film.

ALSO READ:‘UI’ movie review: Upendra’s political commentary is a one-of-a-kind experience despite its flaws

The core idea of Max might remind you of Lokesh Kanagaraj’s Kaithi (2019). With so much happening in a short span of time, it’s tough to emotionally invest in the proceedings. On the other hand, Max’s racy screenplay keeps you curious about the events on screen. A superb fusion of Chethan D Souza’s action choreography and Ajaneesh Lokanath’s ensures an adrenaline-pumping experience.

Max is a star vehicle with admirable experiments from the makers. With Vikrant Rona and Max, Sudeep has deviated from traditional commercial films. The big stars of Kannada cinema are seeking change, and that’s a good sign.

Max is currently running in theatres.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending