Looking for a Lady with Fangs and a Moustache


Tenzin engages in a little monk business.

(2020) Mystery (Abramorama) Oxygen Tobgyal Rinpoche, Tsering Tashi Gyalthang, Tulku Kungzang, Tenzin Kunsel, Ngawang Tenzin, Rabindra Singh Baniya. Directed by Khyentse Norbut

The search for enlightenment is an Eastern concept that we sometimes here in the West misinterpret. It is not always navel-gazing and chanting. It can be hard work.

Tenzin (Gyalthang) is a would-be entrepreneur in Kathmandu, Nepal who aim’s to open “Nepal’s best coffee shop.” When he’s not working on his ambitions, he also takes music lessons, somewhat half-heartedly, at the insistence of his mother, who believes him to be talented. In the meantime, he has assembled partners and funds, and is in the process of finding the perfect location. He brings his pal Jachung (Kungzang) to a bucolic location that was an older building badly damaged in an earthquake. Jachung insists that it was once a monastery and sacred to the goddess; trespassing and taking photos is a very bad idea.

And it turns out he was right. After experiencing some bizarre visions of women that only he can see, Tenzin consults a hip monk (Tenzin) – in shades and bright red headphones, no less – who nonchalantly informs him that he’s going to die in seven days. Tenzin is skeptical but as the visions continue, he consults a grumpy, older monk (Rinpoche) who informs him he has to find a dakini, a kind of feminine spirit who can take any form. Getting her alliance can stave off death.

So Tenzin goes on a kind of a journey through Kathmandu, trying to find a dakini and as the visions become more persistent, his skepticism becomes less sure. Can he find the dakini before he shuffles this mortal coil, or will she turn out to be right under his nose – in the person of singer Kunsel (Kunsel) who is part of his music class?

Most of the criticisms I’ve read about the movie complain that it is far different than the press notes and the poster make it out to be. Some were expecting a Jodorowski-like psychedelic freak-out, which I found kind of odd but okay. This is more of a spiritual journey, although not explicitly religious. In other words, this is very much a Buddhist film – full of wisdom, gentle humor and unexpected beauty. Norbu, who has helmed four other features besides this one (all with similar Buddhist themes), certainly knows his stuff both from a spiritual and practical standpoint. Not only is he an accomplished director, he’s also a spiritual leader among Tibetan Buddhists.

He has the advantage of utilizing Wong Kar Wei’s cinematographer Ping Bin Lee, and he makes full use of that advantage. Not only is there beautiful Nepalese locations to gawk at, the film is expertly framed with breathtaking shots – for example, one by a rushing river at dusk, candles floating on the waters, lights winking like fireflies.

Norbu also has a tendency to use nonprofessional actors and he found one in Gyalthang who has incredible screen presence. Although Tenzin has Western tendencies, wearing a suit and tie, working from a laptop, and with a huckster’s cheerful grin, there’s also something quite appealing about him, even if he is the least spiritual guy in the movie. He goes from monk to monk, asking how he might find a dakini, and gets a different answer every time – they can’t even agree on what a dakini IS. I get the sense that Norbu is also poking gentle fun at the foibles of his own philosophy (Buddhism is less a religion than a philosophy).

The pace is slow and languid and enjoying the film, like attaining enlightenment, requires a bit of patience. Still, this is one of the best films of the year that you’ve never heard of, easily equal of any that will have their praises sung at the upcoming Oscars. In a just world, there would be those sorts of accolades for this one too but I expect that Norbu didn’t make this movie for the kudos. Like Tenzin, he made this to point those on their own spiritual journey to the path of wisdom. Who can find fault with that?

REASONS TO SEE: Very understated and gentle. The music has almost a bluesy undertone. Gorgeous cinematography and locations. Strong performance by Gyalthang.
REASONS TO AVOID: Some might find it slow-paced.
FAMILY VALUES: There is a little mild profanity.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Norbu is actually from Bhutan and is a lama, a Buddhist holy man who was proclaimed as a child to be the third incarnation of the founder of Tibet’s Khyentse Buddhist lineage.
BEYOND THE THEATERS: Virtual Cinema
CRITICAL MASS: As of 4/15/21: Rotten Tomatoes: 86% positive reviews; Metacritic: 67/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Graduate
FINAL RATING: 9.5/10
NEXT:
Together Together


					

Harmonium (Fuchi ni tatsu)


A family portrait on the beach.

(2016) Drama (Film Movement) Mariko Tsutsui, Tadanobu Asano, Kanji Furutachi, Momone Shinokawa, Kana Mahiro, Taiga, Takahiro Miura. Directed by Kôji Fukada

Family dynamics are ever changing, evolving things. What appears to be on the outside may not necessarily be what circumstances are behind closed doors. The whole thing about happy families is that they are in reality a myth for the most part – they are even rarer than a unicorn.

On the surface, Toshio (Furutachi) has a good life. He and his family live quietly in apartments above the machine shop he runs and inherited from his father. If he seems a bit distracted at the breakfast table, he nonetheless provides for his family as best he can. His wife Akie (Tsutsui) is a good Christian woman and a doting mother on their daughter Hotaru (Shinokawa). She is sweet and high-spirited in the way of some children; she is also learning to play the harmonium with indifferent success.

Into the mix comes Yasaka (Asano), an old friend of Toshio. It is apparent he has just been released from prison and Toshio offers him a job and a place to live on the spot. This surprises Akie who knows that the business is struggling but being the polite Japanese wife that she is she says nothing. As the days go by she gets to know Yasaka a little better and her initial reservations seem to be abating and when he shares with her details of his crime she does not recoil. Rather, she is turned on or at least isn’t turned off by the idea of having an affair with him. When they do get physical it’s difficult to know who’s seducing who.

But a tragedy occurs that devastates the family and Yasaka disappears. Eight years later the family is still recovering, if you can call it that. Akie has lost much of her faith and Toshio has become fixated on finding Yasaka, the architect of his sorrow. A new worker joins the family – Takashi (Taiga) – who is eager to help the family heal, but when karma comes to roost it may completely destroy what little unity the family has left.

The movie is presented in two distinct sections; the first is dominated by Yasaka who is like a time bomb waiting to explode; the second is the aftermath eight years later in which the parents are trying to pick up the pieces and cope. It’s quite a bit harder to watch the second half as the emotions in it are so raw and almost overwhelming. What goes on in the first is more of a prelude, a dance around the underlying issues. The second is the after-effect, when the bomb has exploded on the dance floor.

The performances are very measured in the first part. Yasaka is stiff as a board and generally clad in white; Toshio always seems distracted and lost in his own world. Akie has the smile and the charm that she shows to the world but when she is at home she knows her marriage has crumbled into ashes and she tastes the bitterness of them in her mouth.

In the second half Akie and Toshio are still closed off to an extent but the pretenses are gone. Toshio smolders with a desire for vengeance; Akie is protective of what’s left of her family and feels her own share of guilt as to what happened. I won’t say the performances are night and day because they are not – what they are is what you’d expect how people would react to a life-changing tragedy eight years afterwards.

Fukada is one of Japan’s most promising directorial talents and this is the kind of film that shows why many think he may eventually revolutionize Japanese cinema. He has a reputation for being an outside-the-box kind of guy and while it might be difficult for those of us watching with Western eyes, he is truly turning Japanese culture inside out in this film. In its own way it is much like Luis Brunel slicing open an eyeball in Un Chien Andalou.

This is a  truly strong effort that is going to be riding the festival circuit for a short time until it gets a limited release in June (as of this writing). It would be worth seeking out at your local art house, film festival or eventually on whatever streaming service this winds up on. This is a look at changing family dynamics in Japan and what lies beneath the surface of even the happiest of families. It’s absolutely unforgettable and even if it is a little bit on the long side (particularly during the first portion of the film) you won’t be sorry you sought it out.

REASONS TO GO: There is an underlying tension that starts off quietly and slowly builds to a crescendo. The end mirrors the beginning in an unsettling way.
REASONS TO STAY: Another movie that’s too long for its own good.
FAMILY VALUES: There is quite a bit of sensuality as well as some violence.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: This was the Jury Prize winner at the 2016 Cannes Film Festival.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 3/7/17: Rotten Tomatoes: 100% positive reviews. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Guest
FINAL RATING: 7.5/10
NEXT: Are We Not Cats?

Florence Foster Jenkins


Singing is less a delight and more of an ordeal where Florence Foster Jenkins is concerned.

Singing is less a delight and more of an ordeal where Florence Foster Jenkins is concerned.

(2016) Biographical Drama (Paramount) Meryl Streep, Hugh Grant, Simon Helberg, Rebecca Ferguson, Nina Arianda, Stanley Townsend, Allan Corduner, Christian McKay, David Haig, John Sessions, Brid Brennan, John Kavanagh, Pat Starr, Maggie Steed, Thelma Barlow, Liza Ross, Paola Dionisotti, Rhoda Lewis, Aida Ganfullina. Directed by Stephen Frears

 

We are trained as a society to admire the talented. Those who try and fail fall much further down on our list of those to admire; that’s just the way we’re wired. We worship success; noble failures, not so much.

And then there are the ignoble failures. Florence Foster Jenkins (Streep) is a matron of the arts in the New York City in the 1940s. She loves music with a passion that is unmatched. She even (modestly bows her head) sings a little, for which perhaps those around her should be grateful. Her voice is, shall we say, unmatched as well. It sounds a little bit of a combination of a cat whose tail has been stomped on, and Margaret Dumont with a bad head cold, neither of whom are on key or in tempo.

Mostly however she only inflicts her singing on her friends who are either too polite to point out that she really has a horrible singing voice, or on those who are depending on her largesse so they won’t risk offending her and that’s all right with her husband St. Clair Bayfield (Grant), a failed actor who nonetheless has a very strong love for his wife, despite the fact that they never have sex  due to her contracting syphilis on her wedding night with her first husband, the philandering Dr. Jenkins.

Bayfield satisfies his carnal needs with a mistress (Ferguson) who is beginning to get dissatisfied with the arrangement. In the meantime, Florence has got a yen to perform at Carnegie Hall with her pianist the opportunistic Cosmé McMoon (Helberg) which Bayfield realizes could be an utter catastrophe. He takes great care to exclude legitimate music critics who are suspicious of the whole event. McMoon who at first is exploiting Florence with an eye for a regular salary begins to realize that she is a lonely woman who just wants to make music, even though she is thoroughly incapable of it. And there’s no denying her generosity of spirit as well as of the heart, but despite Bayfield’s efforts the carefully constructed bubble around Florence is certain to burst.

I wasn’t sure about this movie; it got almost no push from Paramount whatsoever despite having heavyweights like Streep in the cast and Frears behind the camera. Somehow, it just simply escaped notice and not because it’s an inferior film either; it’s actually, surprisingly, a terrific movie. Not all of us are blessed with talent in the arts; some of us have talents that have to do with making things, or repairing things, or cooking food, or raising children. Not all of us can be artists, as much as we may yearn to be. Some may remember William Hung from American Idol a few years ago; I’ll bet you’ll look at him a lot differently after seeing this.

Streep does her own singing and Helberg his own piano playing which is amazing in and of itself; both are talented musicians as well as actors. Streep is simply put the most honored and acclaimed actress of her generation, and that didn’t happen accidentally. This is another example of why she is so good at her craft; she captures the essence of the character and makes her relatable even to people who shouldn’t be able to relate to her. So instead of making her a figure of ridicule or pathos, she instead makes Mrs. Jenkins a figure of respect which I never in a million years thought it would be possible to do, but reading contemporary accounts of the would-be diva and her generosity, I believe that is exactly what the real Florence Foster Jenkins was.

Hugh Grant has never been better than he is here. He’s essentially retired from acting after a stellar career, but the stammering romantic lead is pretty much behind him now. He has matured as an actor and as a love interest. It’s certainly a different kind of role for him and he handles it with the kind of aplomb you’d expect from Britain’s handsomest man.

Frears isn’t too slavish about recreating the post-war Manhattan; there’s almost a Gilded Age feel to the piece which is about 50 years too early. Needless, he captures the essence of the story. We have a tendency to be a bit snobbish about music but the truth is that it should be for everybody. I don’t think I’d want to have a record collection full of Florence Foster Jenkins (the truth was that she made only one recording, which was more than enough – you can hear her actual voice during the closing credits) but I don’t think I’d want to laugh at her quite the way I did throughout the movie.

The truly odd thing is that yes, when we hear her sing initially about 30 minutes in, the immediate response is to break into howls of laughter but the more you hear her sing and the more of her story that is revealed, the less the audience laughs at her. Perhaps it’s because that you’ve become used to her tone-deaf phrasing, but I think in part is because you end up respecting her more than you do when you believe she’s a goofy dilettante who can’t sing a lick. Strangely enough, you begin to hear the love shining forth through her terrible technique and perhaps, you understand in that moment that music isn’t about perfect phrasing or even talent, although it is generally more pleasing to hear a musician that is talented than one that is not. What music is about is passion and love and if you have those things, well, you have something.

I won’t get flowery and say that Florence Foster Jenkins is a muse for the mediocre, which one might be tempted to say but she absolutely is not; the titular character is more correctly viewed as a muse for those who have the passion but lack the talent. She tries her best and just because she doesn’t have the tools to work with that a Lily Pons might have doesn’t make her music any less meaningful. It is beautiful in its own way and maybe that’s what we need to understand about people in general and how often does a movie give us insights like that?

REASONS TO GO: Streep is absolutely charming and Grant has never been better. Champions the underdog in an unusual way.
REASONS TO STAY: Unabashedly sentimental.
FAMILY VALUES: There is some brief sexuality.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Grant was semi-retired from acting but was convinced to return in front of the cameras for the opportunity to act opposite Streep.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 9/416: Rotten Tomatoes: 87% positive reviews. Metacritic: 71/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Marguerite
FINAL RATING: 8/10
NEXT: Anthropoid