Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Movie Review | ‘Kinds of Kindness’ offers more entertaining, indulgent fare from Lanthimos

Published

on

Movie Review | ‘Kinds of Kindness’ offers more entertaining, indulgent fare from Lanthimos

Filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos hasn’t made the world wait long for the follow-up to his engrossing and thought-provoking “Poor Things,” a nominee earlier this year for the Academy Award for Best Picture.

Going into wide release this week, not quite seven months after “Poor Things” introduced the world to Emma Stone’s unforgettable Bella Baxter, the director’s intriguing, entrancing and, at times, confounding “Kinds of Kindness” is said to have been shot quickly during the lengthy post-production phase of its visually elaborate predecessor.

A “triptych fable,” “Kinds of Kindness” boasts many of the same actors — among them, not surprisingly, is Stone, who deservedly won the Oscar for Best Actress for “Poor Things” for her spectacular and fearless performance — playing different characters in its three stories.

To say this trio of tales is “loosely connected” is a bit generous, although Yorgos Stefanakos’ R.M.F. is a titular figure — but also only so relevant narratively — in each.

One would expect there to be a greater thematic thread tying together “The Death of R.M.F.,” “R.M.F. Is Flying” and “R.M.F. Eats a Sandwich,” but, at least on initial viewing, that connective tissue is pretty thin. In each, at least one character is some degree of desperate to please at least one other character who is some degree of controlling — and, more often not, one of the latter figures is portrayed by fellow “Things” alum Willem Dafoe (“The Florida Project”). Given the gifts of Lanthimos, there surely is more metaphorical meat on the bone to be chewed upon during and after a repeat viewing.

Advertisement

Know, however, that “Kinds of Kindness” is co-written by Lanthimos and Efthimis Filippou, the latter a collaborator on the former’s more self-indulgent (if still radically interesting) films, including “The Lobster” (2015) and “The Killing of the Sacred Deer,” in which the pair’s absurdist leanings sometimes got the better of them. (Nowhere to be found in the credits here is writer Tony McNamara, who helped shape “Poor Thing” and Lanthimos’ other unquestionably terrific — and Oscar-nominated — film, 2018’s “The Favourite.”)

In “R.M.F. Eats a Sandwich,” the third and final act of “Kinds of Kindness,” Emma Stone portrays Emily, a member of a spiritual cult who goes tearing around in a Dodge Challenger. (Atsushi Nishijima photo/Courtesy of Searchlight Pictures)

It comes as no shock, then, that “Kinds of Kindness” sometimes, perhaps even often, feels like it’s being absurd because … well, just because.

That said, it also is a film that, with every scene, has you hanging on with great interest to see what will come next. As a result, it is a two-and-a-half-hour-plus endeavor that goes by remarkably quickly. Whatever its sins, stagnation isn’t one of them.

Stone, appropriately, receives top billing, but Jesse Plemons gets at least a bit more time within the frame.

That’s mainly because while the two are co-leads in the subsequent acts, Stone is a supporting player in “The Death of R.M.F.” Plemons is front and center as Robert, who doesn’t just work for Dafoe’s Raymond but long has been engaged in a bizarre agreement with him. Raymond dictates areas of Robert’s life from his weight — the former is frustrated by the latter appearing to have lost weight, as he finds thin men to be ridiculous — to his intimacy and more with his wife, Sarah (Hong Chau, “The Menu,” “The Whale”). This power dynamic is upset when Raymond finally asks too much of Robert, with Robert subsequently seeing Stone’s Rita as a means to an end.

Advertisement

Next comes “R.M.F. Is Flying,” in which police officer Daniel (Plemons) is distraught because his beloved wife, Liz (Stone), has been lost at sea. When she is found alive and returns to him, Daniel believes something is amiss, Liz enjoying things — chocolate and cigarettes among them — she didn’t previously and, more mysteriously, not fitting comfortably into her shoes. While some around him believe Daniel to be having a psychotic event, he sets about proving his theory.

Lastly, we get “R.M.F. Eats a Sandwich,” which sees Stone’s Emily and Plemons’ Andrew as members of a spiritual cult led by Dafoe’s Omi and Chau’s Aka. Omi and Aka, who bless the group’s all-important “uncontaminated” water with their tears, regularly dispatch Emily and Andrew on missions to search for a figure to fulfill a prophecy of a female twin who can raise the dead.

We’ve kept things vague — believe it or not, it’s all even stranger than it sounds — purposefully because, again, revelations along the way comprise much of the enjoyment “Kinds of Kindness” has to offer.

It also offers fine supporting work from Margaret Qualley (“Poor Things,” “Drive-Away Dolls”), Mamoudou Athie (“Elemental,” “The Burial”) and Joe Alwyn (“The Favourite,” “Catherine Called Birdy”) in each of the three parts.

Plemons (“Power of the Dog,” “Killers of the Flower Moon”), who seems almost as if he’s in more films than he isn’t these days, is his usual dependable self and oddly likable even when the person he’s playing isn’t.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Stone — also an Academy Award winner for 2017’s “La La Land” and a nominee for 2015’s “Birdman (or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)” and “The Favourite” — is sensational again. There may be no Oscar in her future for her work here, but with the energy and personality she brings to each, her character is the most interesting thing on screen in any scene she’s in, which is saying something given some of the happenings in “Kinds of Kindness.”

Stone won’t be enough to keep some viewers from becoming turned off by “Kinds of Kindness.” It’s weird, to be sure, sometimes sexually gratuitous, often dark, occasionally violent and longer than the average movie. As such, it simply won’t fit the tastes of some folks.

Poor things.

“Kinds of Kindness” is rated R for strong/disturbing violent content, strong sexual content, full nudity and language. Runtime: 2 hours, 44 minutes.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
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

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

Published

on

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

In K M Chaitanya’s Aa Dinagalu (2007), actor Atul Kulkarni, playing gangster Agni Sreedhar, says man is the biggest weapon in the underworld. “The rest are just properties,” he adds. The yesteryear Kannada crime drama, based on the real incidents from a big chapter of the Bengaluru underworld, stood out for its understated storytelling.

In Balaramana Dinagalu, which has the skeleton of a sequel to Aa Dinagalu, weapons are seen in the first scene. As the film progresses, we encounter an arsenal of knives, razors, machetes, and guns — each an extension of the gangsters’ identities and an indispensable tool in their quest to remain feared and lethal. Chaitanya attempts to make the movie a mix of reality and entertaining tropes.

Balaramana Dinagalu (Kannada)

Director: K M Chaitanya

Cast: Vinod Prabhakar, Priya Anand, Atul Kulkarni, Ashish Vidyarthi, Ramesh Indira

Runtime: 151 minutes

Advertisement

Storyline: Balarama, an ordinary young man from a remote village in Karnataka, becomes a dreaded gangster who rules Bengaluru

The director has roped in the same cast, who played the dreaded gangster trio of Kotwal Ramachandra (essayed by Sharath Lohitashwa), Jayaraj (Ashish Vidyarthi), and Agni Sreedhar (Atul) in Aa Dinagalu. That’s what makes one instantly curious about Balaramana Dinagalu. The only difference in the latest movie from the previous one is the fictionalised names of the real dons. Jayaraj becomes Jayaram, Sreedhar is Shashidhar, and Muthappa Rai is called Monnappa Rai (played by Ramesh Indira).

Even if these characters are the big draw in the movie, the plot revolves around the journey of Balarama, a character with a small yet significant presence in Aa Dinagalu. Vinod Prabhakar’s portrayal of the titular role is the film’s biggest takeaway. He makes us feel for the character, and is quite impressive in the final portions of the movie, where Balarama struggles to break free from the underworld’s trap.

Balaramana Dinagalu is impressive when it reflects the psychology of a gangster. Jayaram is shown helping the needy while Balarama urges young boys to focus on education. It’s as if these men who commit heinous acts, have a heart as well. Shashidhar is often called “intellectual gangster”, as the film reflects how the underworld fears well-read men in the field. Politicians and policemen, the supposedly the protectors of people being part of the crime nexus, strengthen the movie’s world-building.

The film falters in its inability to rise above the plot’s predictability. Balarama’s journey is no different from the often-seen life of an innocent man from a small town who becomes a gangster owing to uncontrollable circumstances. I wish the film had delved a bit more into Balaram’s personality. Why does he not resist becoming a gangster? What dreams did he have when he moved to Bengaluru from a small town?

Advertisement

“My hands speak louder than my words,” says Balarama. This signals that he is someone who settles conflicts with fists rather than conversations. Despite this detail, Balaram’s entry into the underworld feels too sudden. The predictability strips the sheen away from the well-shot action sequences, as the result of every fight is known beforehand.

Chaitanya is careful not to glorify the act of violence. He wants to portray the negative effects of violence on the children in a family, as the movie ends with a hard-hitting frame. It’s impressive that the actor-director duo has delivered a non-hero-worshipping gangster saga.

That said, the movie could have benefited from a couple of gripping episodes. While it’s important not to romanticise the life of a gangster, there is no harm in delivering moments of peak tension, the biggest plus of the genre. 

The assassination of Jayaram, the impact of Kotwal’s elimination on the underworld, or the Sakleshpura incident involving Monnappa Rai, had the potential to offer edge-of-the-seat, high-stakes portions, but they are rushed. The love story is simple, but it lacks emotional intensity between the lead couple. Santhosh Narayanan’s dance numbers are forgettable (despite it being his forte) while his montage melodies are beautiful.

Balaramana Dinagalu adopts a restrained, almost clinical approach to the gangster genre. While that keeps it from glorifying violence, it also leaves the narrative feeling a touch too neat and emotionally muted.

Advertisement

Balaramana Dinagalu is currently running in theatres

Published – June 28, 2026 07:58 pm IST

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Published

on

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Perhaps there’s a certain irony in a story about a fireworks factory mostly keeping away from explosive drama. Yoshitoshi Shinomiya‘s lowkey feature directorial debut A New Dawn is at the very least visually captivating, comprised of lush and rather hypnotic production design. The story is small scale focusing on a trio of friends who try to save a fireworks factory in their hometown, but the imagery feels expansive and lush. A New Dawn begins with a beautiful and vaguely familiar display of this beauty: the flowing, painterly imagery of its opening sequence recalls Shinomiya’s work on the flashback sequence in Makoto Shinkai‘s your name., immediately showing that the film’s visuals might transcend its small town drama.

A background artist himself on films by Makoto Shinkai as well as the similarly resplendent Pompo: The Cinéphile, it makes sense that this history would be felt in the background works of A New Dawn. They’re dense with detail, rich with almost luminous color and illustrative texture. Shinomiya, who also wrote and storyboarded the film, veers away from the photorealism associated with someone like Shinkai through some impressionist touches – like the splotches of green paint which represent treelines – which sometimes turns into outright abstraction like when a character begins to run through the space. Sometimes there are swaying, morphing textures in the background as splotches of paint subtly shift around. On a more intimate level, the cluttered and characterful interior spaces tell a story too. This is a long-winded way of saying A New Dawn looks really, really good.

It’s not just in the tableaux of its countryside habitats and ramshackle living spaces carved out of abandoned warehouses, but there’s a sense of invention permeating through A New Dawn‘s various experiments with visual languages of animation. The most prominent is an incredibly charming stop motion animated sequence using a cardboard diorama and real human hands invading the shot in a creative reflection of a drunken character’s perspective. Even though it broadly still looks “anime” through its character design, there are also smaller details which work to set A New Dawn apart from its contemporaries, touches like its occasional lineless artwork or the way rain is defined through smudged black brushstrokes.

It’s in the screenwriting where A New Dawn begins to feel more run of the mill. Its story about the constant chasing of the majesty of a fabled firework “Shuhari” feels both familiar in its premise but also a little bit alienating in its structure. The importance of the firework itself never feels clear – the moment its mystery is unravelled hardly feels like a revelation as a result, something amplified by how the writing often obfuscates what anyone is talking about. The whole story feels a little distancing, and despite the allure of the background art and design of the spaces the characters inhabit, the people themselves feel constantly at arms length.

It almost pulls things back with its climax – the detonation of the “Shuhari” goes a long way in justifying the circular conversations about its nature and origins – a painted streak of light launches into the sky before turning into something otherworldly, suddenly tripling down on the film’s captivating exaggerations.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411

Published

on

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411
★ Make Showbiz411 your Preferred Source on Google

As we know, Kevin Spacey is a pariah in Hollywood.

He’s in a rare club with Mel Gibson, Armie Hammer, Nate Parker, Jonathan Majors, and James Franco.

Spacey has managed to avoid jail time by reaching settlements with various accusers of sexual malfeasance, all men.

His film career — which included two Oscars and a Tony Award — has been destroyed.

Advertisement

Spacey has been reduced to appearing in straight to video films, made for whatever reason the various producers involved know only to themselves.

On Friday, a new Spacey movie surfaced against its will, but not in theaters. It also went straight to video. “1780” is a period piece set during the Revolutionary War. Spacey plays a toothless Pennsylvania country trapper.

There is no rating on Rotten Tomatoes, largely because there is only one review. The review by Alan Ng of Film Threat is positive. Ng recently reviewed “World War Bigfoot,” which he also liked. He seems to specialize in reviewing films no one has heard of.

“1780” does boast 25 producers who will probably not see a return on their investment. But they can say they made a movie with Kevin Spacey.

Advertisement

Donate to Showbiz411.com

Showbiz411 is now in its 13th year of providing breaking and exclusive entertainment news. This is an independent site, unlike the many Hollywood trades that are owned by one company. To continue providing news that takes a fresh look at what’s going on in movies, music, theater, etc, advertising is our basis. Reader donations would be greatly appreciated, too. They are just another facet of keeping fact based journalism alive.
Thank you

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending