Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘What’s Love Got to Do with It?’ review: Love, contractually

Published

on

‘What’s Love Got to Do with It?’ review: Love, contractually

Shazad Latif and Lily James in ‘What’s Love Acquired to Do With It?’
| Picture Credit score: Robert Viglasky

So Shekhar Kapur bought a transfer on and at last made a film. It definitely took him some time. His newest, the English-language comedy What’s Love Acquired to Do with It?, comes over fifteen years after Elizabeth: The Golden Age, a stretch of time during which administrators in his house nation are inclined to spawn, prosper, and perish. To be honest, Kapur has stored busy, with tasks picked and deserted. One stored listening to about his Paani (actually, water), which, given how lengthy it has spent within the chilly storage, has virtually turned to ice.

Kapur did direct episodes on the TV reveals Damien and Will. What’s Love Acquired to Do with It? resembles none of these tasks in scale or ambition. It kicks off as a heat, genial comedy in London, the place Zoe (Lily James), an ‘award-winning documentary filmmaker’, is pitching a doc on honour killings to a pair of jumpy producers. They shoot it down — it’s not feel-good sufficient — so Zoe provides them what they need: she’ll movie Kazim (Shazad Latif), her British Pakistani neighbour and pal, as he skips the relationship scene altogether and goes in for an organized, or ‘assisted’, marriage. The producers perk up on the thought (‘Meet The Mother and father, First’, ‘Love, Contractually’, ‘I Hope She’s A…Fairly Girl’) and provides Zoe the go-ahead.

What’s Love Acquired to Do with It? (English)

Director: Shekhar Kapur

Forged:  Lily James, Shazad Latif, Shabana Azmi, Emma Thompson, Sajal Aly, Oliver Chris, Asim Chaudhry, Jeff Mirza

Advertisement

Runtime: 108 minutes

Storyline: Documentarian Zoe (Lily James) observes with anxious curiosity as her British Pakistani neighbour and greatest pal goes in for an organized marriage with a Pakistani bride

Kazim, or Kaz, and Zoe have been buddies since childhood. When he first comes out to her along with his marriage plans, there’s a flicker of awkwardness. The strain steadily magnifies as Zoe, alongside together with her mum, Cath (Emma Thompson), accompanies Kaz and his household to the marriage in Lahore. He’s been organized to marry Maymouna (Sajal Aly), a candy, reticent lawyer—Kaz himself is a physician. They appear like a match, however Zoe is aghast. She retains asking Kaz, in earnest, why somebody would spend the remainder of their lives with a stranger. However is {that a} real confusion — or an indication of a extra private dejection?

Additionally Learn | Filmmaker Shekhar Kapur returns along with his first rom-com, ‘What’s Love Acquired to Do With It?

What’s Love Acquired to Do with It? is most pleasurable when mining multi-cultural, multi-ethnic London for laughs. “We have been on the identical staff for the Muslim Muggles Quiz,” a pair tells to Zoe’s digicam. “It’s for Harry Potter followers searching for Islamic values within the sequence.” Jemima Khan’s screenplay gently ribs each Islamic conservatism and the generalised Islamophobia of white Britain. “You wouldn’t assume they’re Muslims,” Cath says of her modern-looking, English-talking neighbours, having accepted biriyani parcels and attended a next-door nikah in a tent. But she isn’t all that completely different, is she? All through the movie, she retains setting Zoe up with eligible males. The cultural parallels lead as much as the Royal household, Khan and Kapur stopping in need of burdening the movie with overt post-colonial analyses.

Advertisement

The London bits have a decidedly cutesy feel and appear, full with canines, bedtime tales and a cameo by British comic Asim Chaudhary (he performs Mo, The Matchmaker). However the Lahore part is stuffed with heavy feelings, even melodrama. The principle wedding ceremony has sufficient crosscurrents and perfunctory dancing to fill a Mira Nair movie. Kapur shot the movie throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, recreating Lahore in London and Suffolk. Limitations however, it’s not the best-looking movie, far much less achieved than what different administrators have managed in lockdown. I used to be prepared to chop him some slack till I remembered Masoom (1983), Kapur’s debut movie, the place he labored wonders with a number of good actors and a big home.

Shazad Latif is ideal as Kaz, a pointy, self-possessed younger man who sneaks cigarettes round the home and irritably agrees to Zoe that he’s a ‘proud Muslim’. Lily James is okay too, if just a little hemmed in by the romcom heroine template. Shabana Azmi and Jeff Mirza have animated, one-note roles as Kaz’s mother and father. Thompson stands out within the supporting forged, particularly as soon as Cath arrives in Lahore, trying positively bewildered – after which delighted – together with her discovery of masala Coke.

The movie adopts a ‘pros-and-cons’ method to understanding organized marriages in a contemporary context. The second half has plenty of tangled feelings and factors of battle, however not sufficient time to resolve them honestly. Kapur, now 77 and evidently much less confrontational as a filmmaker, appears keen to depart viewers with that heat, fuzzy feeling. The movie wraps up candy, however leaves a bizarre style within the mouth. It’s a bit like masala Coke.

What’s Love Acquired to Do with It? releases in theatres in India on March 17.

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

‘Hitler’ movie review: Vijay Antony’s revenge drama is outdated and ordinary

Published

on

‘Hitler’ movie review: Vijay Antony’s revenge drama is outdated and ordinary

A still from ‘Hitler’
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

Vijay Antony is on a spree with his recent films. While his contemporaries rarely churn out a couple of releases each year, the music director-turned-actor starred in four films last year and his latest release Hitler marks his third outing of 2024. But given how almost all of them turned out to be underwhelming, it feels like he’s shooting for quantity over quality, and Hitler, unfortunately, is the latest addition to that list.

Hitler features a story as old as its eponymous dictator. It starts with the shot of a group of worker women (one of them, of course, is heavily pregnant) who, after a tiring day at work, are at the banks of a river crossing where a makeshift rope gets them from one side to another. Thanks to incessant rains, the water level is higher than normal and this recipe for disaster unsurprisingly ends in a… disaster.

The film quickly moves to Chennai where Selva (Vijay Antony) becomes roomie with Karukkavel (Redin Kinglsey) and just like any Indian film hero, falls in love at first sight with a woman he bumps into, quite literally. Concurrently, Deputy Commissioner Shakthi (Gautam Vasudev Menon) is working on a case that involves a murder spree with identical MO and they all link to the politician Rajavelu (Charanraj) who is constantly losing his black money to the killer. As expected, the two worlds collide and if you haven’t figured out how the rest of the film will pan out and who the killer is, you are probably new to the world of Indian cinema and Hitler might actually intrigue you.

Hitler (Tamil)

Director: Dana SA 

Cast: Vijay Antony, Gautham Vasudev Menon, Riya Suman, Charanraj, Redin Kingsley, Vivek Prasanna

Advertisement

Runtime: 130 minutes

Storyline: A man comes to Chennai searching for greener pastures only to cross paths with a supercop searching for a killer who is robbing a politician’s black money

Hitler, had it released a few decades ago, would have been the textbook example of a vigilante film. But now, it feels like a rehash of multiple cult classics many of us grew up watching and one of them is Gentlemanwhich, incidentally, also starred Charanraj. Sticking to a familiar template is the least of Hitler’s worries as it struggles with a lack of ingenuity. There are attempts to break the mould — like a red herring involving a character played by Vivek Prasanna — but they all fall flat and add almost no value to the painfully predictable plot.

On the upside, the film does a good job of incorporating its female lead into the narrative. Riya Suman plays Sara, Selva’s love interest. After the routine romance-establishing shots, the character is neatly assimilated into the core plot and Riya does a good job with it. Speaking of performances, Gautam looks and feels perfect as an honest supercop forced to work for a politician. Selva, on the other hand, seems to have been written as a mysterious character, whose style of interaction differs on the basis of who he is talking to. But whether it comes across convincingly is a different question; Vijay Antony overselling his overly zealous nature around his roommate is far from convincing.

A still from ‘Hitler’

A still from ‘Hitler’
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

Despite its political backdrop, Hitler never sinks its teeth into its core idea. While it’s lovely to see veteran actor Charanraj back in Tamil cinema after a long gap, he plays a one-dimensional politician who makes the most unintentionally funny decisions ever. When poll predictions aren’t in his favour, he believes bribing people might turn the tide and to escape from the election commission’s strict measures, he sends the black money via local train which gets swindled. If that’s not crazy enough, instead of realising the leaky boat idea, he does that again, twice (I wish I was kidding), to nab the robber only to end up losing crores.

The haphazardly-written Hitler lacks the gripping social narrative Dana’s directorial debut Padaiveeran had or the heart and emotional beats his Vaanam Kottattumoffered, though the story lends itself well to both attributes. Instead, what we get is a watered-down vigilante actioner that neither astounds nor entertains. The tyrant dictator Hitler might have made propaganda films to push his evil agenda, but this Hitler leaves us wishing it had some agenda we could salute.

Hitler is currently running in theatres

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘THE BEAST WITHIN’ (2024) – Movie Review – PopHorror

Published

on

‘THE BEAST WITHIN’ (2024) – Movie Review – PopHorror

I first saw the trailer for The Beast Within a few months ago and it definitely piqued my interest. A UK set werewolf film with Kit Harington as the wolf? Sign me up! I was recently given the opportunity from Well Go USA to check out The Beast Within. Did it live up to the hype?

Synopsis

After a series of strange events leads her to question her family’s isolated life on a fortified compound deep in the English wilds, 10-year-old Willow follows her parents on one of their secret late-night treks to the heart of the ancient forest. But upon witnessing her father undergo a terrible transformation, she too becomes ensnared by the dark ancestral secret they’ve tried so desperately to conceal.

The Beast Within was directed by documentary filmmaker Alexander J. Farrell in his narrative feature debut. The film was written by Farrell and Greer Ellison. The film stars Kit Harington (Game of Thrones), Ashleigh Cummings (Hounds of Love), Caoilinn Springall (Stopmotion), James Cosmo (The Kindred), Andrei Nova, Adam Basil, Martina McClements (There’s No Such Thing As Zombies), and Ian Giles.

So I was pleasantly surprised when I dove into The Beast Within and discovered the film was from the perspective of the daughter Willow, played by Caoilinn Springall, who I thought was wonderful and creepy as Little Girl in Stopmotion. She gets the opportunity to play a much different role here. Willow is a girl that is sick with an unnamed illness which leaves her short of breath and reliant on oxygen tanks. She lives in isolation near the woods with her parents Noah and Imogen, her sole human contact beside her grandfather her lives in a building next door.

Advertisement

Her father is suffering from an ailments that requires him to be secluded in the woods from his family one day a month in the woods. After following her parents one night she discovers her father’s dark secret and becomes deathly afraid of her father. Springall is perfectly cast as Willow. She is very expressive and is able to capably show the range of what her character is feeling. Kit Harington does a solid job as the father Noah, though we don’t get to see as much of his duality as I would have liked. We are mainly subjected to his dark side and its side effects, only briefly seeing the loving father in him.

Ashley Cummings is great as Willow’s mother Imogen, who is clearly struggling with protecting her daughter and her love for her husband. I loved James Cosmo’s performance as Willow’s grandfather Waylon. You can tell her how much he loves his granddaughter and wants to protect her from her father as well as how strained his relationship with his daughter is due to her relationship with and defense of Noah.

The Beast Within does a good job of building tension, helped greatly by the sense of isolation the characters are subjected to. It feels like the characters are truly alone in their struggle. Willow’s fear that she is like her father is palpable. The mood of the film is very oppressive. The werewolf and gore effects, though we don’t get much, is executed well, particularly a particularly gruesome scene I won’t spoil involving a fingernail. While I enjoyed the majority of The Beast Within immensely, there is a late final act twist that I feel could ruin the enjoyment for some viewers.

Final Thoughts 

The Beast Within is a film that excels at mood and a feeling of dread and isolation bolstered by solid effects and strong performances, thought a final act twist could potentially ruin the film for some viewers. Recommended.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: ‘Saturday Night’ is thinly sketched but satisfying

Published

on

Movie Review: ‘Saturday Night’ is thinly sketched but satisfying

We are at the apex of “Saturday Night Live” appreciation. Now entering its 50th year, “SNL” has never been more unquestioned as a bedrock American institution. The many years of cowbells, Californians, mom jeans, Totino’s, unfrozen caveman lawyers and vans down by the river have more than established “SNL” as hallowed late-night ground and a comedy citadel.

So it’s maybe appropriate that Jason Reitman’s big-screen ode, “Saturday Night,” should arrive, amid all of the tributes, to remind of the show’s original revolutionary force. Reitman’s film is set in the 90 minutes leading up to showtime before the first episode aired Oct. 11, 1975.

The atmosphere is hectic. The mood is anxious. And through cigarette smoke and backstage swirl rushes Lorne Michaels (Gabriel LaBelle), who’s trying to launch a new kind of show that even he can’t quite explain.

“Saturday Night,” which opens in theaters Friday and expands in the coming weeks, isn’t a realistic tick-tock of how Michaels did it. And, while it boasts a number of fine performances, I wouldn’t recommend it for anyone hoping to see an illuminating portrait of the original Not Ready for Prime Time Players.

No, Reitman’s movie is striving for a myth of “Saturday Night Live.” Michaels’ quest in the film — and though he never strays farther than around the corner from 30 Rock, it is a quest — is not just to marshal together a live show on this particular night, it’s to overcome a cigar-chomping old guard of network television. (Milton Berle is skulking about, even Johnny Carson phones in.) In their eyes, Michaels is, to paraphrase Ned Beatty in “Network,” meddling with the primal forces of nature.

Advertisement

In mythologizing this generational battle, “Saturday Night” is a blistering barn-burner. In most other ways (cue the Debbie Downer trombone), it’s less good. Reitman, who penned the script with Gil Kenan, is too wide-eyed about the glory days of “SNL” to bring much acute insight to what was happening 50 years ago. And his film may be too spread thin by a clown car’s worth of big personalities. But in the movie’s primary goal, capturing a spirit of revolution that once might have seized barricades but instead flocks to Studio 8H, “Saturday Night” at least deserves a Spartan cheer.

A clock ticking down to showtime runs as ominously as it might in “MacGruber” throughout “Saturday Night.” Nothing is close to ready for air. John Belushi (Matt Wood) hasn’t signed his contract. Twenty-eight gallons of fake blood are missing. And, most pressing of all, the network is poised to air a Carson rerun if things don’t take shape. An executive pleading for a script is told, “It’s not that kind of show.”

What kind is it? Michaels, himself, is uncertain. He’s gathered together a “circus of rejects,” most of them then unknown to the public. There is Gilda Radner (Ella Hunt), Chevy Chase (Cory Michael Smith), Garrett Morris (Lamorne Morris), Jane Curtin (Kim Matula) and Dan Aykroyd (Dylan O’Brien). Also in the mix are Jim Henson (Nicholas Braun), who spends much of the movie complaining about the untoward things the cast has been doing to Big Bird, Andy Kaufman (Braun again), Billy Crystal (Nicholas Podany) and the night’s host, George Carlin (Matthew Rhys).

Most of them pass too quickly to make too much of an impression, though a few are good in their moments — notably Smith, playing up Chase’s braggadocio, O’Brien and Morris. Garrett Morris, the cast’s lone Black member, is in a quandary over his role — because of his race and because he was a playwright before being cast. Though “SNL” was revolutionary, it hardly arrived a finished product. Morris here is a reminder of the show’s sometimes — and ongoing — not always easy relationship to diversity, in race and gender.

It also wasn’t always such a break from what came before. When Chase faces off with Berle in a contest over Chase’s fiancee, Jacqueline Carlin (Kaia Gerber) — one of the movie’s few truly charged scenes — they seem more alike than either would like to admit.

Advertisement

It’s not a great sign for “Saturday Night” how much better the old guard is than the young cast. Along with Simmons’ Berle is Willem Dafoe’s NBC executive David Tebet. He provides the movie its most “Network”-flavored drama, seeing “a prophet” in Michaels and, despite wavering skepticism, urging him to be “an unbending force of seismic disturbance.” Also in the mix — and a reminder that the suits had newbies, too — is Dick Ebersol (a refreshingly genuine Cooper Hoffman ), a believer in Michaels but only up to a point.

Ultimately, this is Michaels’ show, and he’s played winningly by LaBelle, the “Fabelmans” star, even if the characterization, like much of “Saturday Night,” is a little thin. Sometimes by his side, as he races to get the show ready is the writer and Michaels’ then-wife, Rosie Shuster (the excellent Rachel Sennott), who you want more of.

It seems to be an unfortunate truth that dramatizations of “Saturday Night Live” inevitably kill it of laughter. That’s true here just as it was in Aaron Sorkin’s “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.” The exception to that, of course, is Tina Fey’s “30 Rock,” which was smart enough to abandon all the “SNL” mythology and focus on what’s funny.

This “Saturday Night” may have a legacy of its own; a lot of this cast, I suspect, will be around for a long time. And, ultimately, when the show finally comes together, it’s galvanizing. The cleverest thing about Reitman’s film is that it ends, rousingly, just where “SNL” starts.

“Saturday Night,” a Columbia Pictures release is rated R by the Motion Picture Association for language throughout, sexual references, some drug use and brief graphic nudity. Running time: 108 minutes. Three stars out of four.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending