This film is essentially a murder mystery, though not of the conventional garden variety kind. This is not Agatha Christie. There is more than one mystery here including a spiritual mystery encapsulated by the film’s title. The title to the film comes from Psalm 22: “Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.”

This is a film that portrays events that set  in Montana in 1925 at a wealthy ranch owned by two brothers Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) and George Burbank (Jesse Plemons). During a cattle drive the cowboys meet the owner of a saloon Rose Gordon (Kristen Dunst).  Phil the less gentlemanly of the two brothers feels attracted to her while his brother Phil is repelled by her. From there on the calves butt heads as symbolized by an image early on in the film. Phil believes Rose is after George’s money. Rose has son Peter, (Kodi Smit-McPhee), who is a delicate young boy unaccustomed to the rough ways of the west. The film was written and directed by Jane Campion. It has received a lot of favourable attention such as 12 Academy award nomination nominations including Best Picture, Best Director and Best actor for Cumberbatch, best supporting actor for both Plemons and Smit-McPhee and Best supporting actor Dunst who is also the spouse of Plemons. No film has more nominations this year.

While the cinematography is stunning, not every one was impressed that it was shot mainly in New Zealand standing in for Montana. At one time Phil is standing looking up into the mountains and the cowboys wonder what he sees. His reply is curt: “If you can’t see it; it ain’t there.”

Early in the film, Pete in narration, says “when my father passed, what sort of man would I be if I did not help my mother?”  And that is a significant theme in the film.  Masculinity, both toxic and otherwise is important in the film.

Peter is first seen making flowers out of paper for the dinner table in the restaurant, when the staff are rudely dismissed by Phil. “I wonder what little lady made these,” he asks while looking directly at Pete. Phil lights the paper and throws it into a glass of water, as if beauty cannot possibly be masculine. It is only fit to be discarded. Who needs flowers?  Meanwhile the men—the real men—cavort with whores. As a flower child myself, I dissent from the suggestion that flowers are not masculine. Phil writes to his parents warning them that George is courting a “suicide widow.” But George is in awe of Rose. And in time they marry.

George is much gentler and civilized  than his rougher brother. He is a true gentleman. Interestingly George and Phil share a bed in the hotel. But all is chaste.

Though Phil is rougher than George he has his artistic side too. He plays the banjo while Rose is playing the piano and drowns her out. Later Phil also made a beautiful lasso for Peter who becomes his protege.  He also was Phi Beta Kappa in college while studying the classics at an eastern university.  The Governor asks George, “ Does he swear at the cattle in Latin?” He calls the ranch “an island of civilization,” but says Phil’s dirty clothes don’t bother him. “He’s a ranchman. That’s honest dirt.”

Peter may not be as innocent as he seems, for we learn from the maid that he killed a rabbit to practice surgery.  Yet Peter and Phil, so apparently different, are also attracted to each other. Phil becomes his mentor. Peter’s father hung himself and Peter says his father told him he wasn’t kind enough and that he was too strong.  Phil finds that hard to believe.

There is a mysterious death that is central to the story. And it is mysterious.

There are many interesting aspects of this film, Nightmare Alley, but one of them really grabbed me.

Years ago, I read a wonderful book by Robertson Davies, one of Canada’s finest writers at the time.  The book is Fifth Business. Frankly, I read it so long ago I don’t remember much about it. Yet that book had one very disturbing scene at the end that has haunted me ever since. It really was a nightmare scene involving a geek. I had never heard of geeks before, and I am not sure I heard of them again until recently when I watched the film called Nightmare Alley.

A character in Davies’ book described a geek this way:

“Geek…That is what carnival people call them. They are not an advertised attraction, but word that a geek is in a back tent is passed around quietly, and money is taken without any sale of tickets. Otherwise the Humane Societies make themselves a nuisance.  The geek is represented as somebody who simply has to have raw flesh, and especially blood.  After the spieler has lectured terrifyingly on the psychology and physiology of the geek, the geek is given a live chicken: he growls and rolls his eyes, then he gnaws  through its neck until the head is off, and he drinks the spouting blood. Not a nice life, and very hard on the teeth, but if it is the only way to keep yourself in morphia you’d rather geek than have the horrors. The rubes loved it; Willard (the geek) was something even the most disgusting brute could despise…people like to be in awe of something.”

After the geek bites off  the head of the chicken  he swallows it. I keep thinking what sort of people like this?  Now I don’t want to scare anyone off.  You don’t see this on the screen, but it is suggested. And the scene is brief. That is bad enough.

The film is a film is based on a 1946 novel of the same name written by William Lindsay Gresham. An earlier film version was made in 1947. The film was directed by Guillermo del Toro and stars Bradley Cooper, Cate Blanchette, Willem Dafoe , Rooney Mara, and Ron Perlman and other outstanding actors.

In the film the geek escapes and his “owner” hunts him down in the dark alleys of the carnival. When he is caught, he keeps saying, “I’m not like this.”  A sign near by says, “Take a look at yourself sinner.”   The viewers really are looking at themselves and they probably are sinners. The “owner” says, “Folks will pay good money just to make themselves feel better.”  To the public he asks, “Behold one of the wonders of the universe. Is he man or beast?”  That is a question one should ask of the patrons instead.

The men are able to exploit the geek by taking advantage of his addiction to drugs or alcohol. The geek wants them so bad he will geek to get them. Can you imagine how desperate a person must be to do that?

Stan, is played by Bradley Cooper, a charming but overly ambitious carnival worker. He is shady mentalist. He is successful because he understands “People are desperate to tell you who they are. Desperate to be seen.” He uses that knowledge to lead people astray.  He seduces Molly by promising her, “I’ll give you the world and everything in. it.”  How can she fall for that?

The problem for someone like Stan is that he must be careful not to believe his own lies. That becomes dangerous. Stan forgets what Lilith knows, that he is “ a man who thinks he is high above the common man,” but actually is “nothing but an Okie with straight teeth.” He finds out how high he is.

Like the geek, he is a “poor soul.”

If you want to know the truth, I like nearly every movie I see.  But this was not one of them.

Dune: Part One is an American epic science fiction film.  Let me say at the outset that neither of these genres of film are my favourites. The original Dune based on a 1965 novel by Frank Herbert has a large cult following. Frankly, the film left me cold. No more accurately it left me with feeling of dry and infertile sand. A dune in other words.

It was directed by famous Canadian director Denis Villeneuve and has a stellar cast including Timothée Chalamet, Rebecca Ferguson, Josh Brolin, Zendaya (briefly in Part 1) Jason Momoa and Javier Bardem.

I know that this genre of films is extremely popular. Often it seems like the only type of film that  studios continue to make. I also know that at different times in my life I have been addicted to movie genres no more believable than this one, including cowboy films, detective films, or the modern action film in which some rebellious male knights relentlessly challenges some bad dudes and kills them. All of those genres now bore me even though they earn mountains of money at the box office. This one was no exception. I apologize if you like them. That does no make me smarter, or more astute. It just means I have had enough. I need something different. Dune was not it. I could not wait for it to end.

This is an important film. And a joyful film.  Everyone should see it. We can learn a lot from watching it. In particular it helps us to stand in the shoes of someone different and see life from a new vantage point.  What can be more important than that?

The story revolves around a loving and fighting family where 3 people are deaf and 1 is hearing. Each character is forced to confront the point of view of at least one other person. Isn’t that films are all about? That is what I loved about this film. That and it made me feel good.

In the film, Ruby, (Emilia Jones)  the only hearing person in a close knit family of 4 decides to join a school choir mainly to meet a good looking young guy. Her mother Jackie (Marlee Matlin) is confused. Why would she do that? She asks her daughter, “If I was blind, would you like to paint?” It is a joke, but it raises a crucial point.  The mother can’t understand why her hearing daughter doesn’t want to be just like them. Jackie also said that when her daughter was born she hoped she would be deaf so she would be just like her mom. I was shocked by that comment. Yet, film made  it  clear that deaf people don’t see themselves as defective or handicapped. They think they are lucky. There are many things hearing people can’t do that they can do. She wants the best for her daughter, and to her, that is being deaf.

Ruby on the other hand learns that she loves music and is pretty good at it. Her music teacher challenges her to overcome her fears of performing. He asks her how music makes her feel. She can’t find the words.  That is exactly what deaf people do; they can’t find the words either. Eventually, Ruby signs her reply that for her American sign language is the language of feelings and expressions. That is one thing hearing people don’t get. I also think she means that this is also true for music.

The deaf members of the family don’t catch on that Ruby likes being their interpreter, but she wants more than that. She also wants a relationship with a young boy and does not want to give up everything for her family. Her family must learn that. Only her brother understands. In fact, he resents the fact that Ruby is turned to whenever family members need to communicate with the outside world. He wants to do that, even though is he is deaf.

I read that the producers of Coda wanted to use hearing people for the role of deaf people. Matlin was upset at that. She insisted that deaf characters must be played by deaf actors. As Matlin said,

“Enough is enough. Deaf is not a costume. It’s not authentic and insults the community that you’re portraying. Because we exist, we deaf actors. We do a much better job of portraying characters, telling stories that involve deaf characters, because we lived it. We know it.”

When she won an academy award for her first role in the film Children of a Lesser God a movie critic said  she won the award out of pity. He asked how was it acting for her to play a role of a deaf girl?  To this Matlin  responded, how then was it acting for a hearing girl to play a hearing girl? Sometimes hearing people just are not able to stand in the shoes of a deaf person. That is a failure of imagination. And it works both ways.

The beauty of Coda is that we do experience what it means to be deaf. I loved the scene in which the family went to a concert where Ruby was playing. At first the deaf people did not get it either. They too had a failure of imagination. But they watched the faces of the audience and they knew what their hearing child/sibling was doing just by watching. They could see she was special. Just like they were special.

Deaf is not a costume; neither is hearing. Neither the deaf nor the hearing are children of a lesser God.

It’s time to make a confession.  I have been a  James Bond fan forever.  Ever since I was a young lad ordering books from the University of Manitoba Extension Library and one day received a novel by Ian Fleming called Dr. No as a substitute for a book I had ordered,  I was hooked. The Library sent books for free from the University to us poor urchins in the cultural hinterland in places like Steinbach without a library.  If the book one ordered was not available they sent something they thought the reader might like instead. I had never heard of James Bond or Ian Fleming. He was not yet a world wide phenomenon. But the library sent me Dr. No.

I have no idea what book I ordered but I received Dr. No and I was transported into young boys Fantasy land. I found a spy who was licenced to kill. I still remember the opening scene.  3 blind black men in Jamaica walking in line and opening fire on an unsuspecting hapless victim. They were not blind at all. They were assassins. It seems absurd now.  It was absurd, but it was unlike anything I had ever read before. This was exciting stuff!

Amazingly, perhaps, I have been a fan ever since.  When they started making movies out of the Bond books, I loved them too. Guns, girls, and mayhem. What’s not to like.

Of course, the films make no sense. They aren’t meant to make sense. The books didn’t either. Except to young boys and girls living a fantastic dream. Of course, even some heavy intellectuals like Bond.  Peter Bradshaw the long-time Guardian film critic, said movie was “ridiculously watchable.” No matter how absurd it is, my love of Bond endures. Forget about logic.

As a result, it comes as no surprised that I liked the latest Bond film, “No Time to Die.”  They are no longer based on books. They ran out of books decades ago. No matter. I have been a fan of those too. I have come to appreciate the films ever more since Danial Craig took over the role of Bond. Apparently, this is Danial Criag’s  last film as Bond. What a pity.

What happens next? Who knows?

Wild. Weird. Wonderful

I watched a Netflix film called Two Guns, starring Denzel Washington as Robert “Bobby” Beans and Michael “Stig” Stigman played by Mark Wahlberg. Both are supposedly on the side of the law, but both assume the other is a criminal. Both were undercover agents unaware that the other is a lawman (of sort). Beans is undercover agent for DEA and Stig is an undercover intelligence agent for the Navy Seals. Stigs’ boss tells him to kill Beans so that the Navy can use the money to fund unauthorized undercover operations.

In other words, the line between criminals and cops has been rubbed so thin it is extremely porous.  The two cops/criminals decide to rob the bank where Mexican drug lord Manny “Papi” Greco stashed $3million, presumably to sting the other.  But the two get much more than $3 million. They get an extra $43, 125,00. That extra money, in cash, is obviously ill-gotten gains. In fact they quickly realize that criminals will be pursuing them for the cash and likely won’t ask politely for the return of their money.

The criminals whose money was stolen are actually black-ops CIA operatives led by Earl whose money was stolen and who make even the Mexican cartel look like Sunday School children. Earl says he is “the hidden hand of God.” Sort of like Adam Smiths free market and about as benign. He will do what it takes to get his money back.

In the ensuing action they  encounter a bevy of corrupt cops and corrupt criminals. In fact there are no good guys. None. Even the heroes Bobby and Stig are not that good either. I admit that he irreverent banter between the 2 is amusing, but we soon realize these guys aren’t really up to any good either. No one is.

Here is a conversation between Earl and the hapless bank manager who allowed the money to be stolen:

Earl:   The United States is the greatest country in the world because we accept a man at his call: greedy, selfish, and covetous.

Bank Manger: I had no choice

Earl: In America we line everybody up so you are on your own. Grab all you can grab.

Bank Manager: I’m innocent.

Earl: Nobody’s innocent. There’s just the guilty, ignorant, or unlucky.

Stig tries weakly to convince Beans they should do the right thing with the money.  After all there is a Code. Beans denies there is a Code. Like Earl you just do what it takes. The rest of the movie is designed to prove Beans was right. This is no country for good men.

There is no Code.