August 2018 – “Choose Your Director Month”

Posted on by Aaron White.

In January 2017, Feelin’ Film had its inaugural Director Month, covering the films of our favorite director – Christopher Nolan. Going through a single director’s films over the course of several weeks in a row provided a unique perspective on how his work had evolved, and was one of the most enjoyable things we’d done. So, in January 2018, we chose to make Director Month an annual occurrence and covered the films of Stanley Kubrick. This, too, was a wonderful experience for us and left us anxious to do it again.

Looking forward at the new release schedule, we have identified August 2018 as a great time to slip in another Director Month. But this time, we want YOU, our listeners, to choose whose filmography we dive into. Below you will find a list of directors and the corresponding films we would discuss. This is your chance to tell us what you want to hear us talk about on the podcast, and you can vote by clicking on the link below to join our Facebook Discussion Group and selecting your preferred choices in the poll.

Vote Here

Tony Scott

THE LAST BOY SCOUT
MAN ON FIRE
CRIMSON TIDE
DAYS OF THUNDER

Michael Mann

HEAT
COLLATERAL
THIEF
MIAMI VICE

Michael Bay

PAIN AND GAIN
TRANSFORMERS
PEARL HARBOR
THE ROCK

Jeff Nichols

MUD
SHOTGUN STORIES
TAKE SHELTER
LOVING

David Fincher

SE7EN
ZODIAC
FIGHT CLUB
GONE GIRL

Coen Brothers

FARGO
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
INSIDE LLEWYN DAVIS
THE BIG LEBOWSKI

Clint Eastwood

UNFORGIVEN
MYSTIC RIVER
AMERICAN SNIPER
MILLION DOLLAR BABY

James Cameron

THE ABYSS
TITANIC
ALIENS
TRUE LIES

Martin Scorsese

GOODFELLAS
HUGO
THE DEPARTED
TAXI DRIVER

Wes Anderson

THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL
MOONRISE KINGDOM
ISLE OF DOGS
FANTASTIC MR. FOX

Kathryn Bigelow

ZERO DARK THIRTY
THE HURT LOCKER
POINT BREAK
NEAR DARK

Aaron’s Top 100 Movies (2018 Edition)

Posted on by Aaron White.

In 2017, I created my first ever Top 100 Movies list. Many gray hairs formed, I’m sure, as I sat trying to distinguish between beloved films. It’s been almost a year since that list was published and I’ve now seen quite a few more classic films that managed to find their way into my heart and onto this list. As is the case for most folks, my list is ever changing, but this serves as a current reflection of my personal cinematic taste – a snapshot view of the cinephile that I am at this moment in time. My hope is that through this list you might be able to learn a little about who I am as a person by seeing what type of stories I love most.

Note: For the purposes of this list, any film with an asterisk (*) after it represents its series or trilogy. The arrows and number after them specify a film’s movement since the last edition of this list, in this case 2017.

This is my list. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

#1 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring * — —
#2 It’s a Wonderful Life ↑ 1
#3 Casablanca ↑ 31
#4 12 Angry Men ↑ 1
#5 The Princess Bride ↑ 1
#6 Interstellar ↑ 3
#7 La La Land ↓ 5
#8 Jaws ↓ 4
#9 Before Sunrise * ↑ 1
#10 Blade Runner * ↑ 1
#11 The Prestige ↓ 4
#12 Full Metal Jacket NEW NEW
#13 Alien ↓ 5
#14 Toy Story * NEW NEW
#15 Top Gun ↓ 1
#16 The Last of the Mohicans ↑ 1
#17 Jurassic Park ↓ 4
#18 Mary Poppins ↑ 60
#19 Raiders of the Lost Ark ↑ 14
#20 The Wizard of Oz ↑ 20
#21 The Dark Knight ↓ 1
#22 2001: A Space Odyssey ↑ 7
#23 Singin’ in the Rain ↓ 8
#24 Vertigo ↑ 6
#25 Scott Pilgrim vs. the World ↓ 6
#26 Citizen Kane ↑ 18
#27 Inception — —
#28 Star Wars ↑ 44
#29 Rear Window NEW NEW
#30 Almost Famous ↑ 2
#31 The Silence of the Lambs ↑ 55
#32 The Nightmare Before Christmas ↑ 6
#33 Rashomon ↑ 36
#34 Fight Club ↑ 36
#35 Gone with the Wind ↓ 4
#36 The Sound of Music ↑ 25
#37 Lawrence of Arabia NEW NEW
#38 Sleeping Beauty NEW NEW
#39 The Exorcist ↓ 27
#40 The Social Network ↑ 1
#41 The Shawshank Redemption ↓ 18
#42 All About Eve NEW NEW
#43 Scream ↑ 19
#44 The Bridge on the River Kwai ↑ 9
#45 My Neighbor Totoro ↓ 9
#46 The Empire Strikes Back ↑ 11
#47 Unforgiven ↑ 9
#48 The Godfather ↑ 37
#49 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington ↑ 26
#50 Tombstone ↓ 13
#51 Gladiator ↑ 14
#52 The Lion King ↓ 11
#53 The Thin Red Line NEW NEW
#54 The Iron Giant ↓ 9
#55 Seven Samurai ↓ 12
#56 McCabe & Mrs. Miller NEW NEW
#57 Die Hard ↓ 26
#58 Your Name. ↑ 42
#59 Children of Men ↓ 38
#60 Aliens ↓ 24
#61 Back to the Future ↓ 19
#62 Network NEW NEW
#63 Apocalypse Now ↑ 19
#64 Beauty and the Beast ↑ 23
#65 Monty Python and the Holy Grail ↓ 18
#66 National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation NEW NEW
#67 Memento ↓ 9
#68 The Right Stuff ↑ 3
#69 Reality Bites NEW NEW
#70 Black Hawk Down NEW NEW
#71 The Blair Witch Project ↓ 25
#72 Ex Machina ↑ 16
#73 Dead Poets Society NEW NEW
#74 3:10 to Yuma ↑ 3
#75 The NeverEnding Story ↑ 20
#76 The Incredibles ↓ 25
#77 Les Miserables NEW NEW
#78 Whiplash ↓ 28
#79 Groundhog Day ↓ 3
#80 Hell or High Water ↓ 13
#81 Into the Wild ↓ 21
#82 One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest ↓ 34
#83 Warrior NEW NEW
#84 The Cabin in the Woods ↓ 59
#85 Moon ↓ 1
#86 Drive ↓ 59
#87 The Red Shoes NEW NEW
#88 Reservoir Dogs ↓ 34
#89 War For the Planet of the Apes NEW NEW
#90 The Shining ↓ 10
#91 Se7en NEW NEW
#92 The Wailing ↓ 13
#93 The Departed ↓ 41
#94 The Exorcism of Emily Rose ↓ 2
#95 Fargo ↓ 12
#96 Stalker NEW NEW
#97 Pacific Rim ↓ 42
#98 Arrival NEW NEW
#99 Silence ↓ 1
#100 The Perks of Being a Wallflower NEW NEW

Dropped Out: Armageddon, Batman Begins, Dr. Strangelove, Equilibrium, Finding Nemo, Forrest Gump, Gravity, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Inside Llewyn Davis, Kill Bill: Vol. 1, No Country For Old Men, Pan’s Labyrinth, Platoon, Psycho, Pulp Fiction, Serenity, Short Term 12, The Breakfast Club, The Place Beyond the Pines, True Grit (2010), Young Frankenstein

Link to list on Letterboxd

Like it? Hate it? Think I’m crazy? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Aaron White is a Seattle-based film critic and co-creator/co-host of the Feelin’ Film Podcast. He is also a member of the Seattle Film Critics Society. He writes reviews with a focus on how his expectations influenced his experience. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter to be notified when new content is posted.

The Evolution of Eastwood: HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER

Posted on by Aaron White.

HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER (1973)

“It’s what people know about themselves inside that makes them afraid.” – The Stranger

It’s highly appropriate – almost poetic – that Eastwood’s second directorial feature would be a western. What is even more bold and provocative is for it to have been High Plains Drifter, a brutally bleak and gritty story that is grim, violent, offensive, and – perhaps literally – haunted. It’s also deeply compelling and remarkably effective.

The film opens with a horizon shrouded in a blurry heat. Suddenly, not so much emerging as fading into view, a single rider makes his way into the town of Lago, with every public townsperson standing in suspicious awe as he rides through. Within minutes of his arrival, he has killed three men and raped a woman in broad daylight. The next day, this same stranger is commissioned out of desperation to protect the town from the impending threat of three former residents who will soon be released from prison and make their way back to town to enact revenge on those who imprisoned them. He accepts the offer and begins to make every use of his newfound power, rattling every complacent and corrupt citizen’s routine existence into chaos. By the time the three villains do arrive, a deeper and darker purpose behind the stranger’s presence in the town begins to fully reveal itself.

Eastwood returns to his old familiar character, this time a literal “man with no name” as his identity in the film is never confirmed (his character is even credited as “The Stranger”). His performance here is as volcanic as it has ever been, and it is surrounded by a host of equally compelling performances under Eastwood’s strikingly assured directorial hand. The script was fashioned by Oscar-winning screenwriter Ernest Tidymen from a 9-page treatment pitch. It is saturated in mystery and soaked in dread: a quality mirrored in the film’s shadowy visual aesthetic and ethereal musical score. Indeed, the overall tone of the film and the feelings behind some of its individual moments are far more akin to ghost stories than to western legends.

It is difficult to discuss this film, filled as it is with such unflinching ugliness, as a recommendation. But it is also difficult not to recommend a film so confident and coherent in its vision, and so utterly effective in its impact. It should be clarified that there are no real “good guys” in this film. As a textbook example of the revisionist western, wherein good guys and bad guys blend together as shades of grey, this film makes no pretense about its foggy moral complexity and its disturbing view of human nature. Keep in mind something that I mentioned earlier: that the supposed “hero” of our story, within the first fifteen minutes of the film, commits a blatant act of sexual assault. Roy Rogers, this ain’t.

Yet, the film is also surprisingly vocal about matters of conscience, infusing scattered observations about hypocrisy and injustice into its cinematic dna. The film seems to be making sweeping statements of morality such as bystanders who do nothing are never “innocent” or that you can never fully bury your transgressions in the sand. But it does so without allowing the audience the reprieve of a saintly hero. Instead, we get almost the living embodiment of willful vengeance. The premise could be seen as analogous to, “what if a day of reckoning came to certain members of a corrupt society, but instead of a righteous avenging angel who brought justice, it was the Devil himself?” (an analogy further substantiated by the fact that in the film’s final third, The Stranger paints the town blood red and paints the word “Hell” on the entrance sign). Vengeance is at the very core of the film, although on whom and why is not revealed until nearly the film’s final act. But there are hints speckled throughout the narrative that this stranger did not arrive by accident and that every inhabitant’s desperate attempts to control their own fates have merely been the movements of pawns orchestrated by a sinister puppet master.

Not everyone will be on board for this level of moral ambiguity, and rightfully so (John Wayne himself penned a tasteful but derisive letter criticizing the film’s philosophy of humanity and its perspective on the western era of history). But those who can quickly acclimate to this bleak and unyielding revenge tale will likely find themselves highly rewarded, as the film is so effective it almost dares you to try to dismiss it.

As a sophomore effort by Eastwood as a director, the achievement is astounding. He has channeled the muses of both Sergio Leone and Don Siegel, whose works so clearly informed his emergence as a performer, blending both their penchant for grandeur with their haunting storytelling sensibilities. Their names can briefly be seen on the gravestones in the town into which Eastwood’s stranger rides, but it’s only two of many implied ghosts that haunt the tale of the High Plains Drifter. This is a disturbing and provocative film, not to mention powerful, and while its content is likely to distance more than a few audience members, its impact is undeniable.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

The Evolution of Eastwood: JOE KIDD

Posted on by Aaron White.

JOE KIDD (1972)

“You get to a church right now and you pray I don’t see you again before this thing is done.” – Frank Harlan

Eastwood returns to the genre that made him a star after a 4-film gap, and this time, the pedigree of talent is significant. Unfortunately, we can’t say the same about the film.

The script for Joe Kidd, penned by the legendary Elmore Leonard, was given to Eastwood as a star vehicle for him. Cementing the pedigree behind the film’s production was the addition of not only Eastwood as the titular star, but Robert Duvall as a villainous landowner and director John Sturges, who had helmed such acclaimed classics as The Great Escape and The Magnificent Seven.

Set in the early 1900s, the film centers around a former bounty hunter named Joe Kidd (Eastwood) who is reluctantly drawn into a land dispute between the rebellious Luis Chama (played by John Saxon) and the greedy land-peddler Frank Harlan (Robert Duvall). Loyalties are tested and sides are flipped as the contest develops, culminating in Kidd taking matters into his own hands to settle the conflict for good.

On a surface level, there’s a lot to appreciate about Joe Kidd. There is a simple, direct narrative with a crisp and steady pace. The performances are unanimously strong (which is to be expected given the interplay of Eastwood and Duvall). Overall, the film is entertaining enough, particularly for fans of standard western genre fare. The problem is that it’s largely unremarkable, which – when the pedigree of its production is this high – is no small detriment to the film’s commendation. It’s also relatively short for most of Eastwood’s catalogue, clocking in at a mere 87 minutes, which could be a compliment to its economy of storytelling if its individual elements were more compelling.

Eastwood as a performer seems a bit pedestrian this time around, lacking either the stony subtlety of the “man with no name” or the fiery passion he brought to previous westerns like Hang ‘Em High or Two Mules for Sister Sara. On-set information indicates that he was struggling with several health complications, which may have contributed to a lackluster performance, and even at his worst he delivers the appropriate gravity and charisma to be consistently watchable. Duvall is compelling, as always, but relatively under-used, with the bulk of his dramatic moments peppered through his grand introduction to the story. The characters are rather painfully underdeveloped, with stereotypical behaviors and confusing shifts in motivation.

But Joe Kidd is still pretty good. At least, it’s good enough for a Saturday afternoon diversion if you’re a fan of westerns and haven’t checked it out yet. There are some elements to enjoy and certain moments that are undeniably entertaining (like the rather outrageous climactic moment involving a train barreling through a saloon). But the film is ultimately very benign, and given the talent driving its creation, it could – and probably should – have been excellent.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

The Evolution of Eastwood: DIRTY HARRY

Posted on by Aaron White.

DIRTY HARRY (1971)

“Being that this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you’ve gotta ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ Well do ya, punk?” – Harry Callahan

There are two roles for which Clint Eastwood is most prominently known: the “man with no name” from the Sergio Leone westerns and “Dirty” Harry Callahan.

It’s ironic, then, to consider that he not only wasn’t the first choice for the role, he wasn’t even among the first 10 choices. The role was offered to stars like John Wayne, Steve McQueen, Paul Newman, Burt Lancaster, and even Frank Sinatra (who was attached to it for the longest period of time prior to Eastwood). The script (originally titled Dead Right) had been bouncing through development for several years and under several different talent packages before (rumor has it) Paul Newman recommended that Warner Brothers reach out to Clint Eastwood.

Eastwood was in post-production on Play Misty for Me when the original script was sent to him, but by that time the script in development had been in several hands (including a draft by John Milius and one from Terence Malick) and Eastwood did not like the new versions as much as the original. He also insisted that Don Siegel direct the film and even approached Universal executives to get Siegel loaned out for the director’s chair.

Dirty Harry is about a San Francisco police officer (and dedicated to officers who have died in the line of duty) whose nickname comes from the fact that he’s always handed the “dirty” jobs no one else wants to touch. He also has a reputation for using unconventional tactics – which frequently get him and the police force into trouble – to bring criminals to justice. When he begins to close in on a serial sniper wreaking havoc throughout the city, tensions escalate and the department comes under immense scrutiny to both catch the killer and abide by the procedural guidelines. Harry is caught in the crossfire of these two objectives, and you can easily guess which one of the two he cares most about achieving.

Dirty Harry is not only a landmark, signature entry in Clint Eastwood’s career, it is a landmark entry in the crime genre at large. Of the five collaborations Eastwood and Siegel had as director and star, Dirty Harry is easily Siegel’s most stylish film, exploring interesting setups of shadow and color as well as experimenting with differing suspense techniques as well (which would be mimicked by countless police thrillers that followed). The character of Harry Callahan provides an opportunity for wry moments of dark humor for Eastwood (“Well do ya, punk?”) and the violence is heavily intensified from his previous cop-drama, Coogan’s Bluff (which Siegel also directed).

The film stirred substantial controversy in its initial release due to its perceived “ends-justify-the-means” philosophy and the violence (both of which were reasons cited by offered stars for turning down the role). But the film also sparked significant conversation about victim’s rights, which was a major reason why Eastwood wanted to make the film in the first place. The social dialogue intensified around police brutality and questions of procedural responsibility as well.

And although those concerns remain vital points of conversation almost 50 years later, it’s hard not to be plainly and simply impressed by how affecting of a film Dirty Harry is. While other crime thrillers from the same era have disappeared into the status of “relic”, there is a vitality and a potency in Dirty Harry that still thrives. Much of that is owed to Eastwood’s assured and confident performance (strapping back on the gun he left behind for two films – and taking an upgrade while he’s at it), but a tremendous portion of why the film works so well is creditable to Don Siegel’s approach to the picture. By this point, he and Eastwood were such a formidable collaborative machine that it’s quite surprising that they wouldn’t make another film together for 8 years.

It is now pretty widely known that Eastwood himself directed at least one prominent scene in Dirty Harry, and he possibly stood as a secondary directorial surrogate for Siegel on other scenes as well. But whatever cocktail this pair of creatives had drank down, it was electric by this point.

1971 saw three collaborations between Siegel and Eastwood (two of which Siegel directed and Siegel also played a small, bit role in Play Misty for Me) and all three of them are fantastic. The Beguiled is disturbing and fascinating and Play Misty for Me is a nail-biting suspense thriller, but easily the most culturally iconic (and objectively best) of the three films is the indomitable Dirty Harry. It’s a standard-setting film in the cop-thriller genre and one that should not be missed by any remote fan of that brand of story.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

The Evolution of Eastwood: PLAY MISTY FOR ME

Posted on by Aaron White.

PLAY MISTY FOR ME (1971)

“I hope Dave likes what he sees when he gets here. Because that’s what he’s taking to Hell with him.” — Evelyn

Eastwood’s second attempt in 1971 to move away from his stereotypical role was his boldest and most revolutionary career-wise: he stepped behind the camera to direct his first feature film.

He had spent more than 17 years in front of the camera (with nearly 8 of those years in feature films). He had actively learned the processes of production and scripting while leaning on the expertise of directors he admired (most prominently Don Siegel) and felt that he was finally ready to tackle the job himself.

As a first feature, Eastwood was very strategic. He did not want an ambitious war film or even a cop drama or western with their necessary attention to production design and detail. Instead, he chose a very simple domestic thriller, with only a handful of characters and familiar locations, and made Play Misty for Me, which is still regarded today as one of the greatest suspense thrillers of the 70s.

The story is of a radio DJ named Dave (Eastwood) who specializes in classic Jazz and receives a call every night from a fan named Evelyn requesting that he “Play ‘Misty’” for her. When Evelyn tracks him down at his favorite local night spot, the two of them have a one-night stand. The very next week, Dave reconnects with his ex-lover and wants to try to pursue something more serious, but Evelyn has become immediately and violently territorial about her affection for him and she will stop at literally nothing to ensure that Dave is hers and hers alone, even if it kills him.

As a suspense thriller, Play Misty for Me is outstanding. More iconic future entries like Fatal Attraction and even Misery owe a great deal to Play Misty for Me’s premise. Eastwood wisely allows the tension to steadily build rather than try to evoke danger from the onset. Evelyn (played to terrifying perfection by Jessica Walter of Arrested Development fame) begins almost endearingly, as though she were little more than a persistent eccentric. But suddenly – jarringly – she displays outbursts of rage or coercive manipulation. Her shifts in behavior and language are not merely shocking to Dave, they’re shocking to us as the audience, timed with a near perfect cadence for maximum effect. And with each new escalating tactic, the stakes and the threat grow ever more dangerous for Dave and for the people he cares about.

It may not have the cinematic flourishes of other thrillers, but for suspense-lovers, it is a triumph. Eastwood not only manages the directorial duties deftly (adopting techniques and style from his friend, Don Siegel, who plays a small role in the film), but he also delivers a highly compelling acting performance as well. He originally wanted the role to go to Steve McQueen, who it is rumored declined the role because of how much stronger Evelyn’s character was than Dave’s. Following McQueen’s decline, Eastwood decided to take on the role himself and he balances both jobs with the ease of a pro.

As with The Beguiled, Eastwood is again playing a rather vulnerable character, not crippled this time but undeniably trapped and held prisoner by a woman with a sadistic and relentlessly possessive mentality. Eastwood’s excellent balance of disgust, fury, and terror display some of his best range yet as a performer. But unlike The Beguiled, Play Misty for Me was a massive success, both financially and with audiences. It revealed that Eastwood was a director of effective economy: that he could handle the various elements of a film set while still delivering a compelling and effective story and an admirable performance. He would eventually handle much more ambitious material both narratively and thematically, but as a starting point for a directorial career, it’s hard not to be extremely impressed with how effective Play Misty for Me is and how well it holds up nearly 50 years later. It’s an exciting and rewarding entry for suspense fans, and a classic film for anyone else.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

The Evolution of Eastwood: THE BEGUILED

Posted on by Aaron White.

THE BEGUILED (1971)

“You must understand that it was the wine that turned loose the devils in me.” – Corporal John “McBee” McBurney

For nine films (and years of network television) Clint Eastwood had been “a man with a gun”, whether that was in a war film, a western, or a police drama. At this point in his career, he was genuinely concerned about being overly typecast and he made two calculated choices to try to perform against type. The first choice was this Civil War drama, The Beguiled, and his second choice was to finally direct his first feature film.

The Beguiled is a unique entry in both the catalogue of Clint Eastwood and of Don Siegel, its director. At this point, the pair of them had collaborated twice already and had become good friends as well as a veritable mutual admiration society. The opportunity to try their collaborative magic at something quite different appealed to them both. Eastwood himself was a major force behind the project’s inception, having read and become captivate by the original source novel, A Painted Devil by Thomas P. Cullinan. The script went through a few different iterations (including one with a straight-forward “happily-ever-after” ending) before ultimately landing with the results for the final film.

The premise revolves around a badly wounded union soldier (Eastwood) during the Civil War who is discovered and taken in by a group of young ladies at a boarding school. The headmistress is rigid and occasionally oppressive, but the soldier’s presence sends the entire group of young women into distrustful disarray, inciting desirous intentions and deceit, eventually erupting in violence and disturbing behavior as the soldier rejects and accepts certain advances (while making one or two of his own at the same time). The tension and threats escalate to an irreversible degree and the soldier soon realizes that he must find a way to escape or he will be trapped there forever, if not dead.

One of the earliest shots in the film, immediately following the soldier’s being taken into the school, is of a raven tied by a sequence of thread to an upstairs bannister. We discover that this bird had a wounded leg and is being held there while it heals, but we occasionally witness the bird’s frantic attempts to break free of the restraints and fly away. This steadily increasing dread and ever-deepening threat extend throughout the film, and the result is both disturbing and compelling.

It is often a very uncomfortable film in its extremist depictions of relational desire. There are moments involving sensual advances by teenagers and even an incestuous thread (albeit by flash-back). The soldier, too, presents an unsettling attitude towards desire and entitlement, although his perspective is frequently portrayed within a survivalist context (i.e. he’s doing what he ordinarily might not do because of the pressure of his circumstances). This all makes it challenging to openly endorse or recommend the film, but the performances (particularly by Eastwood and Geraldine Page – who plays the school’s headmistress) are exceptionally complex and often captivating.

But the most prominent element of the film is its exploration of the discomfort of gender roles in positions of power. Siegel is quoted as having stated that the film contained in its central theme “the desire of all women to castrate men.” This makes for several outright emasculating qualities to the narrative, which is about as drastic of a departure for Eastwood as you could imagine, even more so than when he sang in Paint Your Wagon. The film disturbingly treats women within certain stereotypes and does no favors for any conversation about equity of value within relationships or society. But the film-craft at work through the production and performances are enough to maintain a highly compelling viewing experience.

The film is also frequently frightening. The narrative plot may be a period drama, but stylistically and tonally, this is a horror film, and nearly everyone is – at one time or another – a monster. It is a strong opportunity for Eastwood as a performer to play a variety of emotions, including ranges of terror and vulnerability that he had literally never shown before. And without tipping too heavily into spoiler-territory, I’ll vaguely mention that there are at least a couple of devastating predicaments in this film that his character doesn’t escape without irreversible consequences.

But the film was not terribly well-received by audiences (although critics praised it rather highly). Eastwood would eventually blame mishandled marketing on the part of Universal Studios and a sensibility from his fans that did not like to see him so vulnerable. Time has been much kinder to it in general (and renewed interest was sparked when Sofia Coppola remade it in 2017). But The Beguiled is a bleak, unsettling, southern-gothic thriller and it is very, very effective. With the disclaimer that there are some highly uncomfortable thematic elements and a few disturbing moments, it still comes with a pretty strong recommendation.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

The Evolution of Eastwood: KELLY’S HEROES

Posted on by Aaron White.

KELLY’S HEROES (1970)

“Sergeant, this bank’s not gonna fall into the hands of the American army. It’s gonna fall into our hands.” – Kelly

When Eastwood originally signed on to lead Kelly’s Heroes, he did so because it was supposed to be helmed by Don Siegel who, following Two Mules for Sister Sara, Eastwood considered his personal friend and favorite director. However, Siegel was bogged down with post-production on that film and unable to fit the production schedule. Meanwhile, Eastwood was unable to back out of his contractual obligation.

Directorial duties then fell to Brian G. Hutton, who had previously helmed Where Eagles Dare. In a few ways, Kelly’s Heroes is quite similar to that film. it features a troop of soldiers on a mission behind enemy lines, but unlike the weighty and twist-filled Where Eagles Dare, this mission is of a more personal nature and the tone is much more light-hearted and direct.

The 34th Infantry Division are disgruntled, frustrated, and overwrought. Their captain is glaringly selfish and whenever he decides to lead his men at all, he frequently positions them either in the way of harm or of boredom. When Private Kelly (Clint Eastwood) learns from a captured German officer about a bank filled with millions of dollars in gold bars, he resolves to travel behind enemy lines to break in and steal the loot. Enlisting the aid of his fellow disgruntled officers, along with a ragtag group of misfits from other divisions, the group cross into enemy territory and begin a series of adventures in misdirection in an effort to obtain the gold.

Eastwood carries top-billing this time, but he’s a bit dwarfed by the rest of the impressive cast. The cast includes the brutish and intimidating Telly Savalas, the apoplectic and hilariously obnoxious Don Rickles, and – in one of his most delightfully eccentric performances – the hippie-zen-warrior “Oddball” played by Donald Sutherland. The cast also includes Carol O’Connor as a naïve commander and Gavin Macleod as a perpetually furious army mechanic. Eastwood anchors the chaos with a steady and assured performance that is by no means a step backwards, but is hard to find impressive amidst such a colorful and entertaining collection of co-stars.

The film deftly balances some genuinely exciting action sequences with a constant thread of sardonic humor. But it is the most cynical film in Eastwood’s filmography thus far, often criticizing without any subtlety the hazards and pointlessness of wartime conditions. Not only is the mission at the plot’s base a mission of profit and desertion, but along the way, the “heroes” of the title enlist the help of nearly every disillusioned soldier, including at least one Nazi. The cynicism becomes perhaps most apparent when the soldiers – essentially on a bandit’s mission – are mistaken for bold and devoted patriots who are making an advance against the enemy (prompting the joke of the film’s title).

There is an utterly chilling moment when, following a particularly significant victory, a Nazi solider who has joined their treasure hunt instinctively gives the Nazi salute, momentarily stunning Private Kelly into remembering who they were before this mission. Once this shocking instinct is realized, the same Nazi alters his posture into a military salute, letting his mouth drift into a self-righteous smirk. It’s a provocative moment of glaring indictment against the whole enterprise that is unsettling and unforgettable.

But despite these alarmingly biting elements, this film manages to be highly entertaining and paced like a bullet, displaying once again Hutton’s talent for handling wartime mission narratives. It is often laugh-out-loud funny and occasionally poignant. It also contains possibly intentional echoes of Eastwood’s collaborations with Sergio Leone, most noticeable in a climactic scene where he, Savalas, and Sutherland face off against a Tiger Tank in a fashion unmistakably reminiscent of a western showdown. With strong characters, a simple and direct narrative, a steady pace, and a sharp tone, Kelly’s Heroes is an easily recommendable war film, whether you enter it with or without affection for that type of film.

Reed Lackey is based in Los Angeles, where he writes and podcasts about film and faith. His primary work is featured on the More Than One Lesson website and podcast, as well as his primary podcast, The Fear of God (which examines the intersection between Christianity and the horror genre). Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook to receive updates on his reviews and editorials.

2018 Feeler’s Choice Award Winners

Posted on by Aaron White.

It’s our 2nd Annual Feeler’s Choice Awards and this year we added two new categories unique to Feelin’ Film: E-Motion Picture of the Year and Poignant Performance of the Year.

Thank you so much to all of the incredible members of our free-to-join Feelin’ Film Facebook Discussion Group who participated by sending in nominations and voting to make these awards a success. There is no doubt that these winners are very representative of the varying cinematic tastes we have in the Feelin’ Film community. Be sure and listen to the 2018 Oscars & Feeler’s Choice Award Reaction episode to hear us discuss these, and we look forward to having even more participation next year.

Best Costume Design PHANTOM THREAD
Best Documentary Feature FACES PLACES
Best Animated Feature YOUR NAME
Best Original Screenplay GET OUT (Jordan Peele)
Best Adapted Screenplay LOGAN (James Mangold)
Best Original Song “This is Me” (THE GREATEST SHOWMAN)
Best Original Score STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI (John Williams)
Best Sound Editing BABY DRIVER
Best Visual Effects WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES
Best Cinematography BLADE RUNNER 2049 (Roger Deakins)
Best Actor in a Leading Role Andy Serkis (WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES)
Best Actor in a Supporting Role Willem Dafoe (THE FLORIDA PROJECT)
Best Actress in a Leading Role Frances McDormand (THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI)
Best Actress in a Supporting Role Laurie Metcalf (LADY BIRD)
Best Director Christopher Nolan (DUNKIRK)
Best Picture DUNKIRK
E-Motion Picture of the Year WONDER
Poignant Performance of the Year Andy Serkis as Caesar (WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES)

2018 Oscar Predictions

Posted on by Aaron White.

Ready for the Oscars this Sunday? The Feelin’ Film team — Aaron White, Patrick Hicks, Steve Clifton, Don Shanahan, and Jeremy Calcara — are here to tell you just who will be taking home those glorious golden statues. Below you will find five definitive lists of who will win at the 2018 Oscars, followed by a brief explanation by one team member of why they made that choice. We believe that these are all objectively correct predictions. Do with that as you will, and if you’re in an Oscar pool this year – GOOD LUCK!

 

Best Picture


Aaron – GET OUT

Patrick – THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI

Steve – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Don – GET OUT

Jeremy – THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI

 

Best Actor

 

Aaron – Gary Oldman

Patrick – Gary Oldman

Steve – Gary Oldman

Don – Gary Oldman

Jeremy – Gary Oldman

 

Best Actress

 

Aaron – Frances McDormand

Patrick – Frances McDormand

Steve – Frances McDormand

Don – Frances McDormand

Jeremy – Sally Hawkins

 

Best Supporting Actor

 

Aaron – Sam Rockwell

Patrick – Sam Rockwell

Steve – Sam Rockwell

Don – Sam Rockwell

Jeremy – Willem Dafoe

 

Best Supporting Actress

 

Aaron – Allison Janney

Patrick – Allison Janney

Steve – Allison Janney

Don – Allison Janney

Jeremy – Allison Janney

 

Best Director

 

Aaron – Guillermo del Toro

Patrick – Guillermo del Toro

Steve – Guillermo del Toro

Don – Guillermo del Toro

Jeremy – Guillermo del Toro

 

Best Adapted Screenplay

 

Aaron – CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

Patrick – CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

Steve – CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

Don – CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

Jeremy -CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

 

Best Original Screenplay

 

Aaron – GET OUT

Patrick – GET OUT

Steve – GET OUT

Don – GET OUT

Jeremy – GET OUT

 

Best Cinematography

 

Aaron – BLADE RUNNER 2049

Patrick – BLADE RUNNER 2049

Steve – BLADE RUNNER 2049

Don – BLADE RUNNER 2049

Jeremy – BLADE RUNNER 2049

 

Best Costume Design

 

Aaron – PHANTOM THREAD

Patrick – PHANTOM THREAD

Steve – PHANTOM THREAD

Don – PHANTOM THREAD

Jeremy – PHANTOM THREAD

 

Best Film Editing

 

Aaron – I, TONYA

Patrick – DUNKIRK

Steve – DUNKIRK

Don – BABY DRIVER

Jeremy – BABY DRIVER

 

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

 

Aaron – DARKEST HOUR

Patrick – DARKEST HOUR

Steve – DARKEST HOUR

Don – DARKEST HOUR

Jeremy – DARKEST HOUR

 

Best Original Score

 

Aaron – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Patrick – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Steve – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Don – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Jeremy – PHANTOM THREAD

 

Best Original Song

 

Aaron – “This is Me” from THE GREATEST SHOWMAN

Patrick – “This is Me” from THE GREATEST SHOWMAN

Steve – “This is Me” from THE GREATEST SHOWMAN

Don – “Remember Me” from COCO

Jeremy – “Remember Me” from COCO

 

Best Production Design

 

Aaron – BLADE RUNNER 2049

Patrick – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Steve – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Don – THE SHAPE OF WATER

Jeremy -THE SHAPE OF WATER

 

Best Sound Editing

 

Aaron – DUNKIRK

Patrick – DUNKIRK

Steve – BABY DRIVER

Don – DUNKIRK

Jeremy – BABY DRIVER

 

Best Sound Mixing

 

Aaron – DUNKIRK

Patrick – DUNKIRK

Steve – DUNKIRK

Don – DUNKIRK

Jeremy – DUNKIRK

 

Best Visual Effects

 

Aaron – WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

Patrick – WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

Steve – WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

Don – WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

Jeremy – WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

 

Best Animated Film

 

Aaron – COCO

Patrick – COCO

Steve – COCO

Don – COCO

Jeremy – COCO

 

Best Foreign Language Film

 

Aaron – A FANTASTIC WOMAN

Patrick – A FANTASTIC WOMAN

Steve – A FANTASTIC WOMAN

Don – A FANTASTIC WOMAN

Jeremy – THE SQUARE

 

Best Documentary Feature

 

Aaron – FACES PLACES

Patrick – FACES PLACES

Steve – ICARUS

Don – FACES PLACES

Jeremy – FACES PLACES

 

Best Documentary Short

 

Aaron – HEROIN(E)

Patrick – EDITH + EDDIE

Steve – EDITH + EDDIE

Don – EDITH + EDDIE

Jeremy – HEROIN(E)

 

Best Animated Short

 

Aaron – NEGATIVE SPACE

Patrick – DEAR BASKETBALL

Steve – DEAR BASKETBALL

Don – DEAR BASKETBALL

Jeremy – DEAR BASKETBALL

 

Best Live-Action Short

 

Aaron – DEKALB ELEMENTARY

Patrick – DEKALB ELEMENTARY

Steve – THE SILENT CHILD

Don – DEKALB ELEMENTARY

Jeremy – WATU WOTE: ALL OF US

BEST PICTURE: How did I get this draw? LADY BIRD was my favorite film of 2017, but it’s too benign for Oscar voters. GET OUT would be a statement win, especially in our current social climate, but I just don’t think older voters are going to push a horror film to the top. For me that leaves THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI and THE SHAPE OF WATER. The preferential ballot and lack of a directing nom for Martin McDonough indicate to me that THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI is vulnerable, even though it keeps hanging around and over performing everywhere. I’m counting on enough voters dropping it low on their ballots, where I think THE SHAPE OF WATER will garner enough top votes to push it over the top. Ask me again tomorrow and I’ll probably tell you something different. – Steve

BEST ACTOR: As much of a lock as there has ever been, Gary Oldman’s transformative performance as Winston Churchill in the Best Picture-nominated DARKEST HOUR is sure to be recognized for its greatness. This performance feels like total immersion into the character with his veins seemingly about to pop at any time, and his stutters and pauses perfectly capturing the enormous pressure weighing Churchill down. Oldman has already won almost every major award for Best Actor thus far and will rightfully take home the Oscar, too. – Aaron

BEST ACTRESS: If you were to add up all the lead-up awards (as I have), this would be a neck-and-neck contest between Sally Hawkins of THE SHAPE OF WATER and Frances McDormand for THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI. The way I see things shaking out, this might be the one Oscar Martin McDonagh’s film wins all night and it’s probably the right one in this Year of Women. Slot McDormand over Hawkins in a race closer than we’ll ever see. – Don

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Willem Dafoe’s Bobby Hicks was the glue that held life at the Magic Castle Inn and Suites together. His presence there not only kept the place in business, but his character brought a paternal presence to it’s residence. I’m glad he got a nod for the nomination, but it’s hard to beat out a film with two strong supporting leads. Sam Rockwell edges out Woody Harrelson for the win. – Patrick

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: I would argue that this is Oscar’s toughest category this year. All five women nominated gave performances that commanded the screen every time they appeared. Given what we’ve seen in awards season thus far, all signs seem to point to Allison Janney winning her first Academy Award for her portrayal of Tonya Harding’s mother LaVona Fay Golden in Craig Gillespie’s I, TONYA. Janney has long been one of Hollywood’s most reliable actresses and she absolutely becomes Golden in a darkly funny role as the unrelentingly awful mom (and lover of tropical winged creatures). If there’s any justice in the world, she’ll agree to share the trophy with that bird. – Jeremy

BEST DIRECTOR: In a very deep category, it’s wonderful to see Hispanic (Guillermo del Toro for THE SHAPE OF WATER), black (Jordan Peele for GET OUT), and female (Greta Gerwig for LADY BIRD) diversity.  That’s promising for the state of film, but there can only be one winner and it’s going to be Guillermo del Toro.  Since January, him winning the Golden Globe, the BAFTA, and, most importantly, the DGA Award from his Directors Guild peers seals his Oscar victory. – Don

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: Earlier in this awards season, THE DISASTER ARTIST was running away and hiding with this category as the preordained choice of cult and niche cinephile fans. As soon as that Hollywood in-joke of a film hit general audiences, it died a death about as quick as the film it’s based on. Surging ahead instead is CALL ME BY YOUR NAME, adapted by veteran screenwriter James Ivory, who has never won the Big One after years of Merchant-Ivory awards bait offerings. This is the place for voters to throw this topical LGBT message film a bone and to cap a respected career for Ivory. – Don

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: This was once wide open, but it seems to have settled into a two horse race between GET OUT and THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI. As much as I really want to see Greta Gerwig on that Oscar stage, I fear support for LADY BORD is starting to wane, and it could get shut out completely. I really believe Jordan Peele and GET OUT are going to squeak by with this one. THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI is pesky, but with no persons of color considered a threat for an acting win, you can bet the Academy will want to honor their commitment to squashing #OscarsSoWhite in some fashion, and Peele is very deserving here.  – Steve

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: Roger Deakins has been nominated for Best Cinematography 14 times and somehow, inexplicably, he has gone home with empty hands 13 of them so far. This has to be the year the Academy finally recognizes his staggering greatness, right? BLADE RUNNER 2049 was sadly skimmed over in major categories, but my thinking is that the critically acclaimed film will still win some technical awards, including this one. The one contender that has performed well on the award circuit and could yet again spoil Roger’s party is most likely Dan Laustsen for his gorgeous work in THE SHAPE OF WATER. But that film will win plenty of other awards. This one goes to Deakins. – Aaron

BEST COSTUME DESIGN: Um, really? Was there ever any doubt as to what film was going to win Best Costume Design. The movie is called PHANTOM THREAD for goodness sake. Besides that, the stunning costumes add to the overall tone of the entire film and make it the most worthy recipient of the Oscar. – Patrick

BEST FILM EDITING: Last year, Patrick defined Film Editing this way: “Pacing would be the operative word to describe the quality of a well-edited film. Did it flow? Did each scene lead well into the next? Were there abrupt changes to the tone of the film as a result of the way it was pieced together?” Well, this year there are a few films that likely good take home the award, chief among them being DUNKIRK, BABY DRIVER, and I, TONYA. I wouldn’t be surprised if any of these win, but the award circuit buzz seems to favor I, TONYA and this feels like a year when we’re going to see several films taking home multiple statues. – Aaron

BEST MAKEUP/HAIRSTYLING: As the bald man of the group, it is my absolute honor to judge and handicap this category. I know my sugar-honey-iced-tea. For me, the fact this is the one remaining Oscar category to still skate by on three chincy nominees instead of a full field of five is ridiculous. Surely two more films could have been honored to compete. Of the three, this is duel for “Best Lead Character Transformation” more than anything else, and Gary Oldman’s disappearance into Sir Winston Churchill for DARKEST HOUR will win over making Jacob Tremblay as ugly as he is cute in WONDER. – Don

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE: 2017 seemed to be the year of what has come to be known as modern minimalist music in film. BLADE RUNNER 2049 and DUNKIRK, scored by Hans Zimmer, really dive deep into this style. Desplat’s THE SHAPE OF WATER, however, takes a different approach, and really becomes another character in the film. Beautiful and haunting, and a lock to take home the award. – Patrick

BEST ORIGINAL SONG: Sigh, the best song never seems to win the Oscar, and the frontrunner all along has been “Remember Me”, from COCO. It’s nice and sentimental, but it isn’t particularly memorable outside the confines of the film. I’m expecting the Academy voters to finally honor the true best song and go with “This is Me”, from THE GREATEST SHOWMAN. This song has become a global anthem of inspiration, and has made a star out of powerhouse singer, Keala Settle. – Steve

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN: This award could easily go to THE SHAPE OF WATER, but like with Best Cinematography this seems like the proper place to recognize BLADE RUNNER 2049 and in a year with so many worthy nominees of high quality, this one goes to the futuristic world over the fairy tale one.  – Aaron

BEST SOUND EDITING: It might seem a little odd that a film that was repeatedly criticized in its initial release for having dialogue that was hard to hear is now the odds on favorite to win the award for best sound editing. But upon further examination audiences realized that they were hearing exactly what Gregg Landaker, Gary Rizzo and Mark Weingarten wanted them to hear in Christopher Nolan’s DUNKIRK. Nolan’s completely immersive film makes the viewer feel like they’re on the beach at Dunkirk largely because of the deft hand with which this crew recreates the sounds of war. BABY DRIVER may sneak up and take this one, but my money is on DUNKIRK. – Jeremy

BEST SOUND MIXING: Every year we talk about how the difference in Sound Editing and Mixing is so small that usually the same film wins both. While I do think BABY DRIVER’s unique style could change things up this year by winning Sound Editing, ultimately I believe both awards will go to the relentlessly visceral sound of DUNKIRK. Honestly, in any other year DUNKIRK would be a slam dunk, but BABY DRIVER does give me pause due to how integral sound is to it as well.  – Aaron

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS: I’m not going to apologize for supporting what I think is the runaway pick in this category. That’s not to say the other four nominees aren’t worthy. They clearly are. But when you can get me to cry from watching a digital ape act on screen, you’re doing something right. I also believe this will be Andy Serkis’ indirect Oscar for his performance as Caesar because both need each other to make this success story what it is.  – Patrick

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE FILM: Pixar typically has a stranglehold on this category, and this year is no different. The first of their films set south of the border is a celebration of family and following your dreams, with all of the classic Pixar bells and whistles thrown in. They have no competition here. COCO it is. – Steve

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM: There was some trading going on among Feelin’ Film contributors regarding who would be given the opportunity to highlight this category and after a long fight that ended in Patch struggling but ultimately succeeding in yelling “UNCLE” through his tears, I won the opportunity. I’m picking Ruben Ostlund’s THE SQUARE here. Why? Because I saw the trailer and I like Elizabeth Moss. The Swedish film, which is about an art installation at the X-Royal Art Museum in Stockholm, has received rave reviews and won the Palme d’Or at Cannes. It’s going to win. – Jeremy

BEST DOCUMENTARY (FEATURE): The odds on favorite to take away this year’s statue for best documentary feature is Agnes Varda’s FACE PLACS. The doc, that follows the famed director and the artist known only as JR while they travel the countryside of France and take large photos of the people they find there, has stolen hearts of viewers everywhere it has played. This will be Varda’s second Oscar in less than a year after having been given the Academy Honorary Award back in November. – Jeremy

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT SUBJECT: The dreaded “short” categories will make or break your Oscar ballot. This year is a toss up, but I’m leaning toward EDITH + EDDIE, a story about physical abuse of the elderly, sure to tug at a few heartstrings and anger a few people along the way. – Steve

BEST ANIMATED SHORT: This year’s nominees were all strong contenders, and my favorite isn’t even the one I think SHOULD win. GARDEN PARTY stands above as a visually stunning display of animation on top of a left field plot (if you could call it that) with an ending that is the perfect exclamation point to its tale. But I think my favorite of the five will take home the statue this year. DEAR BASKETBALL is a fantastic balance of words, visuals and music, wrapped up in a visceral experience that isn’t forgettable, at least not to me. (This may end up being first time an NBA player will have won an Oscar which will be crazy in and of itself). – Patrick

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT: As a nice get with press credentials, I’ve actually been lucky enough to see all five of these obscure films. I don’t have to throw a dartboard and guess like most everyone else. In this unfortunate era of mass shootings, the absolutely harrowing experience that is DEKALB ELEMENTARY reenacting at true story of a school secretary talking down a would-be school gunman is, far and away, the best of this bunch. – Don

Agree with our picks? Disagree? Want to share your own? Leave us some feedback. We’d love to discuss them with you. Thanks for reading!