MOVIES: Number 6 in a popular series and ultra-controversial topics in three other films

National Observer

7 days ago

The Canadian screen awards will be on TV this Sunday. They're on CBC GEM which means they'll get 90 minutes, not just an hour as has been the usual recently. The popular Edmonton comedian Lisa Gilroy will host and Universal Language leads the nominations with 13. David Croneberg's The Shrouds is next with nine. I'm rooting for The Apprentice, which has five. It's the film about and not to the liking of Donald Trump.
Incidentally the first film I review today is exactly the kind he wants to slap with a tariff. Karate Kid Legends was developed in Hollywood and Georgia but ran away to film in Montreal.
Karate Kid: Legends: 3 stars
Bring Her Back: 2 ½
KARATE KID: LEGENDS: The original film came out in 1984 and remains much loved in many a DVD collection. It spawned several sequels and here, number six in the series, is short, speedy and entertaining. With much the same story arc too, well eventually. Early on, the teenager at the center teaches the tricks of his fighting style to an adult, quite a reversal that. Then it turns right side and has adults teach him to prepare for the big showdown these films require. How that comes about both echoes and builds on the original.
A kung fu whiz kid from Beijing (Ben Wang) is relocated to New York City because his mother was hired by a hospital there. (Does that happen?) He gets drawn into a multi-faceted story line: attracted to a girl at school (Sadie Stanley), helping out her ex-boxer father (Joshua Jackson) by training him for a bout to earn money and payoff a loan shark, and getting menacing attention from her ex-boyfriend (Aramis Knight) who is a local champion fighter. The answer is to face him in a rowdy tournament held on top of a skyscraper. That requires training.
Enter Jackie Chan as a wise coach and Ralph Macchio as the now-grown up Karate Kid who he played in the first film. Chan entered the series a few films back and here spouts pearls of wisdom (like the deceased Mr. Miyagi used to do). 'In life you have only one question,' he says. 'Is (something) worth fighting for?' Apparently this is. It'll resonate with any kid thinking about growing his own strength and courage. The mom in the film insists 'No fighting.' But sometimes you have to, says the film, and gleefully shows a lot of it. Take that as a content warning. And note a surprise late cameo, another case of melding diverse parts of this series. (In theaters) 3 out of 5
MOUNTAINHEAD: If you enjoyed the terrific series Succession about a media family's turmoil, check out this film from its creator, Jesse Armstrong. He again gives us an acerbic view of rich men who think they're special, surely better than the people who rule countries. One actually has his eye on Argentina. Another runs a social media app that is causing turmoil in several countries. There's panic buying in Tokyo. Violence in Pakistan. Riots in several cities all caused by a new example of Artificial Intelligence, which a tech mogul (Ramy Youssef) has built.
He hosts three other tech execs (Steve Carell, Jason Schwartzman and Cory Michael Smith), all self-satisfied, at a Utah mountaintop modernist mansion that gives the film its title. He gets fawning praise ('You built a great AI') and they all watch the TV news reports of what it has caused. The script lays out the case against AI directly. It's being used for deep fakes, promoting genocide, sectarian division, market instability and fraud, it says. 'What we have is toxic,' says one. The four dismiss the negatives easily and instead delight in comparing their personal net worth. Three are multi-billionaires. They turn on one among them suspecting he's a traitor and secretly advocating government regulation. Their answer and the over all caustic view of the leaders of big tech is typically Jesse Armstrong. And timely and intelligent. (Starts tomorrow, May 31, from HBO, streaming on CRAVE) 3 ½ out of 5
APRIL: Pretty well every discussion point about abortion comes up in this powerful film from Georgia (the country not the state). Women's rights, their health, dangerous procedures, and more are part of the story of an esteemed obstetrician defending herself. A birth she supervises (and is shown full frontally) goes wrong. The baby is still-born. The father protests to the hospital administration, alluding to the OB-GYN's well-known side activity, providing abortions for women in the surrounding rural areas. The hospital investigates and we get a stark and moving look at the case sharply written and directed by Dea Kulumbegashvili. The film has won awards at festivals including a special jury prize at Venice.
As she is questioned we get her side: she did everything she could, she didn't make a mistake, she's not a murderer as the father charged. Why no C-Section? The woman didn't want it. She wanted a natural birth. One startling line: 'That woman was relieved. The child was dead.' Chilling statements like that come up at times although the film explains very positively why she also does abortions. She's helping women who have to hide their pregnancy and women who can't afford birth control pills. At the same time, she's a loner, says she in this sympathetic performance by Ia Sukhitashvili 'There is no space in my life for anyone,' she says. We get much of her backstory to explain why and a startling scene that shows her coming on sexually to a man. Also doing two abortions, not graphic but powerful. There are too many overly long, almost static scenes, but it's a very strong and thoughtful film. (Montreal and Vancouver for now) 4 out of 5
BEAUTIFUL EVENING, BEAUTIFUL DAY: This submission to the Oscars earlier this year is nominally from Croatia but also a co-production with Poland, Cyprus, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Canada. That may indicate the length the producers had to go to get funding. Their original backers stepped away when they heard what one of the main themes is: discrimination against gays. That's shown during the 1950s, when Croatia was part of Yugoslavia and Tito was in power and often seen on TV decrying 'foreign influences diverting our socialist principles.' The film keys on one 'decadent manifestation' with a story of four friends who make films with government support but become shunned when word gets around that they are gay. An official from Agit Prop (Agency for Agitation and Propaganda) is sent to sabotage their work.
The film by writer-director Ivona Juka is a plea for freedom in the arts anytime, though the events are specific to the Tito era. Films were supposed to be propaganda, not realism. A debate over a script ends with an official saying: 'I wrote it. The party approved it. That means it's good.' There are many other swipes at the system: examples of nepotism, shortages of consumer goods, even mandatory sharing of residential space and recurring anti-gay attitudes. And worst of all, life in a notorious prison colony, where beatings in a gauntlet and rape are the toughest scenes. The message is stark: anti-Communist and anti-regime. And well-staged. (Select theaters: Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver now; Victoria late June) 3 out of 5)
BRING HER BACK: Here's a horror film that's considerably better than the death-after-death versions we're getting these days. This one has a real story and, though it ends weakly, it is unsettling and full of growing dread. It spares us from too much body horror trying to make us gag. Although there are two incidents that might have that effect, a character eating his own skin and a shocking meet of a mouth and a knife. I heard even hard-core horror fans gasp at that one. But there's the story around them and it may be what attracted twice-Oscar-nominated Sally Hawkins to star in it. She's English; the film is by twin brothers Danny Philippou and Michael Philippou in Australia.
Sally plays a woman grieving the loss of a daughter and now asked to be foster mother to two children who have lost their parents. Grief is the main theme and it gradually evolves with a growing sense of unease. Billy Barratt and Sora Wong play the siblings, Andy and Piper, and we watch them get fearfully accustomed to their new home. There's another child there, a boy who is more and more creepy whenever we see him. And Sally's character acts strangely, watches old VHS tapes about a cult that believes in bringing people back to life. The spirit, she says, stays alive for quite a while after death and can be revived. A bit of cannibalism is advocated, like in some primitive societies that anthropologists have studied. The film grows the horror smartly, even makes the two kids feel blame, but can't keep the tension at high level all the way. The ending fades. (In theaters) 2 ½ out of 5