The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)

 The Purple Rose of Cairo

My personal opinion that the best Woody Allen movies are those without Woody Allen just got another confirmation. While “The Purple Rose of Cairo” is undisputably a Woody Allen movie, he is himself absent from the movie and the movie totally works.

We are in New Jersey during the Great Depression where Cecilia (Mia Farrow) is a not very successful waitress, living in a not very successful relationship with the abusive and lazy Monk (Danny Aiello). Cecilia spends her time dreaming of something better and nowhere more so than in the cinema.

Her current favourite movie is a romantic flick called “The Purple Rose of Cairo” and she watches it as often as she can get away with it. One fateful evening something weird happens. The character Tom Baxter (Jeff Daniels), an archaeologist who in the movie will fall in love with a cabaret singer, suddenly turns around and addresses Cecilia directly. He has noticed that she is always there and looking at him and he want to know her. Tom steps out of the movie and leave the cinema with Cecilia.

Unsurprisingly, this gets both very strange and really messy. The movie cannot go on without Tom, leaving the other characters in confusion, the cinema owner does not know if he dares stop the movie and calls the studio in a panic. The studio is at a loss on what to do since this is spreading to other towns and sends the actor behind the Tom Baxter character, Gil Shepherd, to New Jersey to convince Tom to rejoin the movie. Meanwhile, Cecilia and Tom have a most strange affair with Tom realizing that the real world is a lot more complicated than his movie world and Cecilia trying to balance everything going on. This is not getting easier when Gil shows up and seduces her. Now Cecilia has to chose between a fantasy character or a real-life man.

It is very easy to recognize this as a Woody Allen movie. He has projected a lot of his own characters into the Cecilia character, making her a female version of himself. Woody Allen also has a thing for the period between the wars and in many ways “The Purple Rose of Cairo” is a parallel to his later movie “Midnight in Paris”, which incidentally is my favourite Woody Allen movie. While Owen Wilson’s character is being transported back to the 1920’ies, Cecilia is being transported into the world of her movies (in the thirties) and this daydream or surreal experience helps them find out something about themselves and get out of a rut they are stuck in.

The idea of getting in and out of a movie harks back to at least Buster Keaton’s “Sherlock Jr.” and this is an obvious inspiration. A decade or so after “The Purple Rose of Cairo”, this theme was explored again in “The Last Action Hero” with a lot of the same points. This is both a very outlandish theme and one that most people cannot help to have had, watching movies, “what if I could join the movie or maybe these people would show up in real life?”. It takes some juggling to make us suspend our disbelief, but I think Allen is quite successful here, mainly by making it a comedy. By using it for comedic effect, we can laugh off the elements that makes no sense and the craziness becomes part of the fun.

This is where I think “The Purple Rose of Cairo” gets successful, it is genuinely funny. Not in the slapstick manner of “Sherlock Jr.”, but in the messy way an Allen movie gets funny with the critical element that we are spared Allen himself. Mia Farrow and Jeff Daniels are fully able to lift this kind of comedy, and I was having a great time watching this.

I honestly expected this to be a movie I just had to get over with and then it turned out to be one of the best movies so far of 1985. Highly recommended.

 

Out of Africa (1985)

 

Mit Afrika

“Out of Africa” was one of the big winners at the Academy Awards for this year, and it is not difficult to see why. This is a gorgeous looking movie with A-list actors and a biopic that avoids many of the classic story-arch tropes. I believe I only watched it once before, at an age where I was totally unable to appreciate it.

Karen Dinesen (Meryl Streep), of affluent family and Bror Blixen (Klaus Maria Brandauer), a Swedish Baron, both long to get away to live a different life and so make an alliance of convenience and move together to Kenya, a British colony in 1913, to setup a farm. Karen, now Baroness Blixen, soon finds herself pretty much alone on the farm as Bror is busy everywhere else than home. She has to learn to navigate this very different environment the hard way, but she gets to love her life on the farm and her interactions with the Kikuyu tribe as well as the Western community.

Through her friendship with Denys Finch Hatton (Robert Redford) she gets to appreciate the wilderness, which makes for an odd counterpoint to her very European home at the farm. Yet, her wilderness skills come in handy when, instead of being evacuated during the war, she opt to run supplies through the wilderness to troops fighting Germans in Tanzania (then German East Africa). As her relationship with Bror becomes increasingly estranged, her relationship with Denys develops into an awkward romance. Awkward, because it challenges Denys free spirit nature. Yet, it is safe to say that Karen Blixen was also quite a headstrong free spirit herself.

Rather than the custom happy ending, the finale is something of a collapse. Certainly, Karen’s African adventure comes to a sudden halt, but even that is done with a poetic touch and not without beauty.

To my great shame I have never read anything by Karen Blixen, and I have not even visited her home, Rungstedlund, now a museum, even though it is only a short drive from where I live. Yet, I am familiar enough with her appearance and reputation and, knowing that, trying to apply those on Meryl Streep’s character is an interesting exercise. I think she does it quite well. There is a long way from the old lady I am familiar with to the young woman moving to Kenya, but I sense her spirit here. Only clear miss is the awful attempt at replicating Karen Blixen’s characteristic haughty Rungsted accent. It just sound weird and sometimes it is entirely forgotten.

I very much like that this is a biopic that try to tell her story and tell us why it is that she is supposed to be special. Of course there is a lot of human-interest elements, but these are integral parts of her story and are not overshadowing her work and the personality that would grow into the famous writer she became. I also like that, despite some deviations from her actual history, the story development is tied to her real life. It takes the story in directions an invented story with its requirements to follow a Hollywood story-arch, would never go.

This is a slow picture. Despite it’s 160 minutes, the story is fairly easy to sum up, but I think this slow pacing was a good choice for this movie. It has to dwell on the characters and the situations for it to get under our skin. It allows us to get familiar with Karen Blixen’s life in Africa, even in details that might otherwise be neglected because it is in those details the story gets special.

“Out of Africa” is also a window into colonial Africa. In hindsight we can mock or be upset about the colonial order of things, such as the white Europeans looking completely out of place, yet lording it among the natives, but I think the movie has enough sensitivity that it can both show the absurdity in this status and find objectively good elements happening. The Masai are described with awe and respect, the issues around schooling for people who until recently had no use of it, and the potential conflict between economic development and preservation of nature and culture. There are a lot of layers in this movie, and it is its slowness that allow them to be there.

I liked “Out of Africa” a lot better than I expected I would, and I think I will point towards this one in the future when discussing biopics. It is a movie for adults, but I think I have finally grown old enough to watch and enjoy it.

 

 

  

Weird Science (1985)

 

Off-List: Weird Science

When I was in eight’s grade, the coolest movie I watched that year was “Weird Science”. For a nerdy teenage boy, this tapped into... everything and we watched it in a computer evening class, no kidding (though it was more a club for gamers than anything else. Gaming here meaning Commodore 64...if you were there, you know). Therefore, how can this movie not be one of my off-List movies for 1985?

Wyatt (Ilan Mitchell-Smith) and Gary (Anthony Michael Hall) are nerdy teenage boys who dream of girls but are utterly afraid of them. It appears that the only friends they have are each other. Besides being hazed by other boys from the school, Wyatt’s brother, Chet (Bill Paxton), goes out of his way to make life difficult for Wyatt.

While watching “Frankenstein” on the television Gary get the idea that they can make a simulation of a woman on Wyatt’s computer and use it to, well, learn and test out freaky stuff. Soon they are sitting with bras on their heads, feeding the computer information on women while it is hooked up on a mainframe and connected to a doll. At this point something weird happens. They tap into something magic and it works, they have conjured up a real woman, except this is not a normal woman but then super model Kelly LeBrock with magic abilities. Lisa, as they call her, is all at their disposal. Their wildest dream come true, Gary and Wyatt have no idea what to do with it and a number of comical situations ensue. The take a shower with her, go to a blues bar and hang out at the mall. Seeing how incapable the boys are, Lisa gets in action to help out. She invites everybody to a party a Wyatt’s home, including two girls, Deb (Suzanne Snyder) and Hilly (Judie Aronson) whom Gary and Wyatt particularly like.

This of course goes completely off on a tangent. A lot of magic stuff happens as Lisa can make and transform anything and particularly when the boys try to show off by re-doing the experiment, but accidentally conjure up a Pershing II missile instead of a woman... In a climactic scene the house gets invade by doom bikers, upset they were not invited. Will Gary and Wyatt step into character?

This is a magic movie that really requires you to suspend your disbelief. There are a lot of things that do not add up, but none of that matters. It is wacky and nuts, and hilariously funny. Some things unintentionally, as the 1985 version of hacking into a mainframe while other stuff is just insane as the missile or the freezing of Wyatt’s (annoying) grandparents.

At the centre of it, of course, is the two boys who have to get out of their shell. As in most coming-of-age stories, particularly the Hollywood ones, this means they have to stand up for themselves and dominate somebody else, in this case the bikers. Doing that they have now qualified to have girlfriends.

Almost forty years later, “Weird Science” is not as amazing as I thought it was back then, but that would have been a tall order. It is maybe a little too magic and certainly way too cliché, but it is still hilariously fun. I laughed a lot watching it and my son, who is now in eight’s grade totally loved it. That means something. I still love movies about geeks who get the girls and do awesome stuff.

The movie also features a young Robert Downey Jr. as one of the boys hazing Gary and Wyatt. He needs no other introduction.

I really love eighties comedies, and this is one more to the collection.

My Life as a Dog (Mitt liv som hund) (1985)

 

Mit liv som hund

Before director Lasse Hallström became an accomplished, if not famous, Hollywood director, he worked in Sweden, primarily doing videos for ABBA, but in 1985 he directed “My Life as a Dog” (“Mitt liv som hund), which became an international hit. “My Life as a Dog” is a special entry on the Danish “1001” list.

In the late fifties, Ingemar (Anton Glanzelius) is a boy of around 10 years with a single mother (the father is absent) and an older brother. The mother (Anki Lidén) is very ill and mostly in bed and Ingemar’s life revolves around attention to his sick mother and his beloved dog. When her illness takes a turn for the worse, Ingemar is sent to his uncle and aunt (Tomas von Brömssen as Gunnar and Kicki Rundgren as Ulla) in a small town in Småland. Ingemar gets to know a lot of the locals there, like the tomboy Saga (Melinda Kinnaman), the village beauty Berit (Ing-Marie Carlsson) and bed-ridden old Mr. Arvidsson (Didrik Gustafsson) to whom he read aloud advertisements for women’s underwear.

Eventually, Ingemar returns to his mother, but she soon dies and Ingemar is sent back to his uncle and aunt. He learns his dog has also died and the combined loss threatens to send him over the edge.

Throughout the movie, Ingemar does and says things that are mildly disturbing. Often unintentionally, it drives his mother nuts, and he gets a reputation for being strange. In the little town in Småland, he starts on a blank sheet where everybody is a bit odd. This makes him open up and make friends. When he becomes the object of a triangle drama with Saga and another girl he reverts to his strangeness and acts like a dog, but even that is somehow dealt with and leads to a catharsis moment where he finally gets to face and process his grief.

It seems to me that the title refers to how Ingemar sees his life as that of a dog. Both in the sense that he has to accept that focus is on somebody else, and he has to do something wild to get some attention and that the life as a dog is a lot simpler. As a dog there is no responsibility, no decisions and no expectations. This is both something he experiences and aspires to when things are difficult. Facing life and grief requires maturity and courage and this is his coming of age.

There is a sweet sub-plot around Saga who is unhappy being a girl. She likes boxing and football and is concerned that eventually her growing into a woman will prevent her from doing these things. For her there is also a coming-of-age process where she must accept who she is and is becoming and admit to herself her feelings. When we see her in the end in a dress, soiled with mud, it indicates how she has embraced both aspects of herself.

As most Swedish movies “My Life as a Dog” moves along in a slower pace than we are used to and at the same time, Ingemar’s strangeness is like an accident or disaster waiting to happen. This combines to give the movie a feeling of impending doom in slow motion, which I suppose serve well as an analogue to Ingemar’s feelings, but also makes the movie a bit difficult to watch.

In the end we learn that Ingemar is convinced that he is the one to blame, that he caused his mother’s death and implicitly that he is somehow in control of bad things that happen. Finding out that things happen that you cannot control and that you, as a child, are not guilty of, is part of his growing up.

Frankly, while I watched “My Life as a Dog” I did not like it much. The feeling of impending doom made it difficult. Afterwards, however, I am a lot more positive about it when I think of it. There is something in the message that is really comforting and seeing all these odd characters getting along is heartwarming. Therefore, a modest recommendation from me.

 

Come and See (Idi i Smotri) (1985)

 

Gå og se

The are difficult movies, there are tough to watch movies and then there is “Come and See” (“Idi i Smotri). I suspect the intension was to convince the viewer of the horrors in Belarus during the Second World War and, yes, thank you, I am now very convinced.

Fliora (Aleksei Kravchenko) is a boy, maybe 13 or 14 years old, who is drafted by partisans in 1943, much against his mothers wishes. He is set to do drudgery and left behind with a girl, Glasha (Olga Mironova) when the partisans move on. Glasha and Fliora are bombed and narrowly escape a German paratrooper attack. They go to Fliora’s village, only to find everybody killed in a pile. Fliora knows of a hideout in the swamp, but rather than finding his family, he finds a lot of other starving villagers.

Fliora and three others set out to find food. Two of them are blown up in a minefield and the third is killed by Germans when they try to spirit away a cow. The cow dies too. Fliora narrowly escapes the firefight, but is surprised by the Germans when he tries to requisition horse and cart to bring the dead cow back. The owner of the cart hides him in his home, but that almost gets Fliora caught when SS gathers the entire village in the community hall and sets in on fire.

All this, sounding so trivial in a summary, are presented in all the horrific details, always with an increasingly broken Fliora at the centre. There is a step up in horror through the sequences, so just when you thought it could not get worse, it just does, by about an order of magnitude. For the final destruction of the village, I could only watch this with half an eye, while I tried to distract myself with something else. Otherwise, I would have gotten physically sick. I can only imagine how it would have been to watch this in a cinema (which, reputedly, required an ambulance outside to take sick people away from the cinema).

Kravchenko, as the boy, exposed to all this horror is a study in the effect this have on an impressionable young human being. All innocence is ripped out of him, everything he loves is taken away from him and destroyed and you see it in his face. While it is terrible to look at (suffering children is my personal limit), I cannot help being impressed with this acting effort.

As any movie coming out of the Soviet Union, the movie has a purpose and, in this case, it feeds into the national story of the violation done to Russians (and Byelorussians by extension) during the war. It is very convincing at that, and it cannot even be blamed for exaggeration. In all likelihood, reality was probably even worse. What is interesting is what it choses to show and what is not presented. We see villagers and peasants rounded up and killed and those who escape are fighting it out as partisan, heroically. The few we see who are not peasants, are suspected as or are outright collaborators of the Germans. We see no suffering Jews and no suffering intellectuals. There is a monopolization of the suffering by those that represents the regime.

Today, the suffering of the Russians during the Second World War is still playing a huge role in the Russian mythology and is frequently referred to as an argument for the Ukraine invasion, which is really odd, considering the reversal of the roles (Kravchenko is actually banned from entering Ukraine). A movie like “Come and See” ought to convince anybody that invading other people’s country is a very bad idea and considering the local undesirables as animals that can be destroyed is something to be abhorred. But I guess you can read different meanings into this.

There is no doubt “Come and See” is an impressive and effective movie, and while it probably ought to be watched, it is not an experience I wish on anybody. It will take me some time to recover from the brutality of the scenes in this movie.

  

Happy New Year 2025

 

Happy New Year 2025

It is that time of the year again, 2025 is just around the corner. Another year is in the bag, for better or worse.

I know I usually give a small summary of the year in general, but as I would just be repeating myself, I would like instead to mention an observation. On a radio show I listened to recently, it was mentioned how apocalyptic movies and tv series are in vogue. It is not something that has just happened, it has been creeping up on us over the years, but I think it is very true. Screen through the Netflix program or any other streaming service, and dystopic, apocalyptic or post-apocalyptic titles are abundant. I used to like the genre, but lately I find it terribly oppressive and often a little too close to reality.

If I have one wish for 2025 it would be for a more positive vibe. Something a bit more hopeful.

A bit more like the eighties.

In 2024 I reviewed just 47 movies, making this the slowest year for me so far. 7 of these were off-List movies, leaving 40 movies on the List. This took me from 1982 to 1985.

The greatest movie experience of the year must have been watching the Talking Heads concert movie “Stop Making Sense” in a cinema full of fans (reviewed in September). This was an experience I can only recommend.

On my book blog I read and reviewed 8 titles, taking me from 1824 to 1833. This is good enough for me and there have been some very decent books among them. The best probably being “The Red and the Black” by Stendhal.

I wish everybody a happy new year and all the best for 2025.

Cocoon (1985)

 

Off-List: Cocoon

The first off-List movie of 1985 is “Cocoon”. This is, again, a family favourite from my childhood, one of those movies I watched multiple time back then and which I am therefore disposed to in a way that I can hardly consider it objectively.  Also, it belongs to that group of sweet eighties movies that makes me long for a different age where everything was less... grim.

In two separate tracks, we follow Jack Bonner (Steve Guttenberg), the captain of a boat that takes people out fishing and a group of elderly people at a retirement home, particularly the trio of Art (Don Ameche), Ben (Wilford Brimley) and Joe (Hume Cronyn) and their wives, Mary (Maureen Stapleton), Alma (Jessica Tandy) and girlfriend Bess (Gwen Verdon).

Jack is on the verge of losing his boat when he scores big time. A group of underwater archaeologists wants to rent his boat for a few weeks. This is pretty awesome, and he even starts hitting on one of them, Kitty (Tahnee Welch) until he learns they are actually aliens.

 Life at the retirement home is dull, it is mostly a place where you wait to die, but Art, Ben and Joe have found their little escape. Now and then they sneak over to the empty neighbouring house where there is a heated pool to have their fun. One day, however, they learn the house is empty no more, yet they are not willing to give up on their little treasure, so they sneak in and continue to use the pool.

Slowly the pool is filling up with big rocks and although at first they are slightly disturbed by this, they do feel great. In fact, they seem to be finding their youth again. Of course, they get caught in the act and realise the people they have been trespassing on are... aliens.

“Cocoon” is a feel-good movie, but with a bitter-sweet flavour that makes it a relevant movie. The core of the story is that of these elderly people finding their youth again, blooming at a time where this should be just a distant memory. There is something extremely invigorating, literally, at seeing them getting this happy. It challenges the unfairness that we all must fade away eventually, but it also returns the question if refound youth (and potentially eternal life) will not upset a few things. There is a price to this, even if it is not at first obvious.

“Cocoon” is also a hilariously funny movie. Guttenburg was at this time involved in tons of comedies, but the stars of this movie are the old folks. They were fun before they found their youthful energies, and unstoppable after. There is something incredible endearing about them that makes you want to be their friends.

The winning argument for me today, however, is to see this as a sort of comeback for all these elderly Hollywood stars. Every single one of them has a CV that would make anyone proud, and I have watched them here and there in earlier movies. Hume Cronyn and Jessica Tandy had at this point been married for more than forty years. To watch them all giving stellar performances here in the autumn of their lives touches me very deeply.

When I watched “Cocoon” as a child, what I loved was the adventure, the idea of aliens returning to earth to rescue those left behind thousands of years ago and to give the opportunity to travel with them to space and it bothered me that Ben’s grandson, David (Barret Oliver) was not allowed to join that adventure. This adventure still works today, although eclipsed by those points mentioned above. This is largely due to the always excellent work of one of my favourite directors, Ron Howard.

“Cocoon” takes me back to a better time, but it is not a movie that feels old. We watched it as a family movie, and it works all the way round. Highly recommended.