No one can doubt George Clooney’s celebrity status nor can they reasonably throw dirt at his work in front of the camera. A quick scan of the Oscar winner’s acting credits shows a career many would envy. It’s when you mention his directing that things get a little shaky. He has hit his mark a few times namely with “Good Night and Good Luck” and “The Monuments Men” (that’s right, I’m an actual defender of that movie. Nice to meet you.). But his misfires have been pretty pronounced with “Leatherheads” and the abysmal “Suburbicon” instantly coming to mind.

His latest film “The Midnight Sky” sees Clooney as both lead actor and director, his first dual-duty role since 2014. The story is adapted by screenwriter Mark L. Smith (“The Revenant”) from Lily Brooks-Dalton’s 2016 debut novel “Good Morning, Midnight”. It’s an interesting choice for director Clooney, bigger in scale and more ambitious than anything he has helmed before. Here he has made a movie that wears its inspirations on its sleeve which may push away demanding viewers hungry for something completely original. But “The Midnight Sky” is no stale uninspired rehash and reducing it to such ignores the film’s more personal aims.

This moody dystopian drama is set in 2049, three weeks after an unspecified global catastrophe (referred to only as “the event”) caused deadly levels of radiation to begin spreading across the earth’s surface. Clooney plays Augustine Lofthouse, a renowned astrophysicist and the last remaining soul at the Barbeau Observatory deep in the Arctic Circle. His colleagues and their families have evacuated, heading south to hole up in underground safehouses. But Augustine stayed behind, unconvinced that leaving was the best course of action and content to live his last days alone with his terminal illness.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Augustine passes his time monitoring the radiation’s rapid spread and attempting to establish communication with the rest of the world. The thick-bearded, gravelly-voiced Clooney gives one of the best performances of his career portraying a somber tormented soul wrestling with feelings of deep-rooted regret (three short but well-handled flashbacks reveal a squandered relationship, the source of his melancholy). He’s the embodiment of loneliness, a man self-condemned and resigned to his fate. But then two unexpected twists change his course.

First he notices the crew of the planet’s last active space mission Operation Aether are returning to earth following a survey mission to a potentially habitable moon. If Augustine doesn’t re-establish contact with the unaware space station and warn them of the earth’s status the five-person crew will be arriving to their own deaths. Second he discovers a little girl named Iris (bright-eyed newcomer Caoilinn Springall) left behind during the evacuation. It sets up the well-worn father-figure/daughter-figure dynamic that actually works thanks to Clooney’s wounded sincerity and Springall’s quiet and unadorned presence.

Meanwhile aboard the Aether the crew carries on their daily duties despite growing concerns about losing contact with earth. The diverse and talented group of Felicity Jones, David Oyelowo, Kyle Chandler, Demián Bichir, and Tiffany Boone make up the team of home-sick scientists, some more fleshed out than others but each believable in their role. The visual effects pop off the screen from the imaginative ship design to the simple but foreboding way the movie contrasts the darkness of space with the blinding white of the Arctic tundra. And then there’s the film’s biggest set piece, a stunning spacewalk to repair a communications array that clearly borrows from “Gravity” but packs its own quiet white-knuckled intensity. There is a musical number to Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline” that I could have done without but be that as it may.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

The story jumps back-and-forth between the Aether‘s crew pushing through unforeseen dangers and Augustine setting out with Iris across the frozen wasteland to a remote weather station with a stronger antenna. It sounds action-packed, something akin to summer blockbuster material. But while it has its genre moments, this is a much different film. At its core “The Midnight Sky” is reflective and tragic, even poetic; a bleak meditation on humanity’s last days. Some are sure to push back on Clooney’s unrushed approach, but it’s exactly what this type of story needs. Even DP Martin Ruhe’s extraordinary cinematography and Alexander Desplat’s elegant yet aching score support the film’s contemplative framing.

One of the biggest mistakes you could make with a movie like “The Midnight Sky” is falling into the comparison trap. Sure, if you look for it you can see a few story beats from “Interstellar”, a set piece inspired by “Gravity”, and the occasional ruminative rhythm of “Ad Astra”. At times you may be reminded of “The Martian”, “Moon”, “2001”, and “Arrival”. In other words it does what so many sci-fi movies do at this stage in the genre’s history – it embraces its inspirations. But it also has its own story to tell about loss, love and the yearning for what we leave behind.

“The Midnight Sky” is destined to be a divisive movie. For some it will be emotionally cathartic and fitting for a year like 2020. Others will find it to be shallow, derivative and lacking its own identity. For me its issues are considerably smaller. It splits so much time between earth and space that some of its characters get shortchanged. And as a result some of the big emotional moments don’t quite have the punch they should. But thankfully “The Midnight Sky” doesn’t hinge on a scene or two. And I like the fact that George Clooney, both the actor and director, sticks to his vision while tipping his hat to many of his important influences. “The Midnight Sky” is now showing in select theaters and will premiere on Netflix December 23rd.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

When we first see Chadwick Boseman as the ambitious young trumpeter Levee in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” it’s both a smile-inducing moment and a stiff punch in the gut. As most know, Boseman passed away this past August following his private battle with colon cancer. He was just 43-years-old. “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” marks his final film appearance which unavoidably brings extra attention and emotion. But don’t think that’s the reason Boseman’s performance has been so well received. This may very well be the best work of his career.

While Boseman is sure to get most of the attention this really is an movie with rich, magnetic performances throughout. It starts with Viola Davis playing the eponymous Ma Rainey. Davis offers up a fierce portrayal, capturing the classic blues icon’s tough and abrasive exterior. The film shows Ma to be a surly hard case, fiery and combative, willing to use her clout to push back on all of the era’s oppressive establishments and frankly anyone else who ticks her off.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Set in 1927, the bulk of the story takes place during one scorching hot afternoon at a recording studio in downtown Chicago. By this time Ma Rainey had already been christened the Mother of Blues and she had learned the hard way how the game was played. She knows her agent and the record producer (both white) only want her for her voice and the money it will bring them. That’s why she doesn’t mind making them squirm, wondering if she’s actually going to show up. Meanwhile her band arrives on time and sets up in the basement to practice.

Most of the movie takes place in two rooms, the basement where the band warms up and the recording room. While Ma’s name is stamped in the title, it’s in the basement that we see the film’s star. When Boseman’s larger-than-life Levee arrives he comes with enough charisma to fill the entire room. He’s a force of personality brimming with self-confidence; a bit impetuous and headstrong which stands out most when he playfully butts heads with his older bandmates. There are some terrific dialogue-rich scenes in the basement where generations and philosophies clash. They even differ on music. Levee wants to pep things up while the others keep reminding him “You play Ma’s music when you’re here.”

By the way, those older bandmates are played by the exceptional trio of Colman Domingo, Glynn Turman, and Michael Potts. They cut through the dialogue with a sparkling chemistry and each are given their own scenes that reflect on their experiences as black men in 1920s America. But it always comes back to Levee played by Boseman with a wild-eyed vigor. Levee is far from one-dimensional and as his layers peel away the late actor is given a couple of meaty moments including one big “Hey Oscar!” monologue and a later scene that seems ready-made for awards season consumption. Yet Boseman nails both, unearthing his character’s deep-rooted pain and anger. It’s a stand-out performance.

The focus shifts a bit when Ma and her entourage finally arrive at Hot Rhythm Recordings. A snarling whirlwind of indignation, Ma immediately ups the temperature in the already sweltering studio, locking horns with her antsy agent (Jeremy Shamos) and challenging the patience of the studio head (Jonny Coyne). Even the band gets a taste of Ma’s ire, especially Levee who can’t quite get in line with her strict ways of doing things. It all sets up a combustible third act ending with a final scene that hits like a ton of bricks.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

While Boseman gets to dig deep into his character’s psyche, Davis is mostly restricted to Ma’s tough-as-nails exterior. She gets to let loose in portraying Ma as an ill-tempered force of nature, but only gets a few lines that hint at who she was underneath. The rest is vaguely implied or expected to be known from history. So it may not hurt to read Ma Rainey’s Wikipedia page before watching. For Davis’ part it’s a fearless and fascinating performance, but the script leaves so much buried within her character and ultimately untapped.

The film is based on August Wilson’s 1982 play which was the second part of his Pittsburgh Cycle series chronicling the black experience in America during the 20th Century. Director George C. Wolfe doesn’t stray from the story’s stage roots but the doesn’t strictly adhere to them either. There are a handful of scenes that pull us out of the studio and energizes the setting. And Ann Roth adds to the period detail with her magical costume design that could have been plucked right out the Roaring Twenties. Yet despite its efforts, chunks of the movie still feel considerably more stagey than cinematic. But that’s hardly a deal-breaker especially when screenwriter Ruben Santiago-Hudson fills his scenes with rich soulful dialogue and you have such flavored performances from a stellar ensemble. And none are better than the late Chadwick Boseman. “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” premieres on Netflix December 18th.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

One of the most exciting and talked about features from this year’s Sundance Film Festival was Lee Isaac Chung’s “Minari”. The film won two of the festival’s top awards and earned high praise for its lead Steven Yeun. A star on the rise, Yeun followed up his well received television run on “The Walking Dead” with several impressive big screen supporting roles most notably 2018’s critically-acclaimed “The Burning”. In “Minari” the 36-year-old Yeun teams with a superb cast to tell a tender slice-of-life story that leaves an unforgettable mark.

This is the fifth film from Chung and easily his most personal so far. Inspired by the birth of his daughter, Chung began writing down memories from his own childhood in Arkansas, most of them were from when he was around 6-years-old. He then began building a narrative arc, full of autobiographical nuggets but with its own distinct story to tell. The results are sublime. With “Minari” Chung has made a quietly affecting film, one of such understated beauty and with a soothing intimacy that stirs the soul.

Image Courtesy of A24

Jacob Yi (Yeun) and his wife Monica (Yeri Han) came to America in the early 1970s, working briefly in Seattle before settling in California. There they had two children while making a living chicken sexing (for the uninformed like me, that’s when you separate male and female chicks). Tired of barely scratching by, Jacob moves his Korean-American family from California to rural Arkansas. That’s where Chung settles in and patiently unfolds his gentle yet bracingly authentic immigrant/family drama.

The film opens with Jacob driving a moving van and Monica close behind in their station wagon with the kids. They travel along several miles of gravel roads before finally arriving at their new home – a mobile home sitting on five acres of rugged Ozark farmland. All Jacob sees is potential and a chance at some version of the American Dream. Monica’s doubt is evident from her first startled look at the house trailer. “That’s not what we agreed on.” This sets up a crucial family conflict that simmers throughout most of the story.

As their parents struggle to plant their feet in their new life, the children offer a unique and unvarnished perspective. Their pre-teen daughter Anne (Noel Cho) seems mature beyond her age and you get the feeling she has a better idea of their situation than she lets on. Their 7-year-old son David (played by captivating newcomer Alan S. Kim) has a heart murmur but you’d never notice. Bright and precocious, David has a lively and mischievous spark and his childlike honesty offers up some of the film’s funniest moments. He has a scene-stealing charm that’s sure to leave people talking.

Image Courtesy of A24

Feeling overwhelmed, the couple invite Monica’s mother Soonja (Yuh-Jung Youn) from Korea to help with the kids. The arrival of the abrasive and unrefined grandma creates an entertaining shift in the family dynamic. Youn is an absolute treat especially when paired with Kim. Their characters have a wonderfully combative relationship that inevitably softens over time. Soon Youn is teaching her grandson how to play cards while he introduces her to the simple joys of pro wrestling and “mountain water” (which is actually Mountain Dew). “It’s good for you“, he earnestly explains.

Even wackier is Will Patton’s Paul, an eccentric yet strangely endearing local who spends his Sunday’s dragging a life-sized cross down miles of dirt road. But he also knows how to work the land and when he’s not exorcising evil spirits from the Yi family’s property he’s helping Jacob jump-start his Korean vegetable garden. But it proves to be hard work (ask the property’s former owner) and it begins to eat into the family’s limited funds. And as Jacob is digging a well, buying a used tractor, and courting potential buyers of his produce, Monica is at home growing more and more disillusioned with her husband’s dream.

Perhaps Chung’s most powerful creative choice comes in his consistent focus on the personal moments. “Minari” is all about relationships: a struggling husband and wife, a puckish young boy and his crass grandmother, two community outsiders building a garden together. Big things do happen but often off screen or in the background. Instead Chung relishes the intimate interactions which are so often found in the minutiae of everyday living. And while the film does deal with a Korean-American family’s assimilation into a white rural community, Chung’s beautifully realist lens is much more focused on the personal things that bring us together and sometimes tear us apart.

Image Courtesy of A24

I can’t help but mention a quiet but meaningful scene where Soonja takes her grandson to a creek on the edge of the family’s property. There she takes some seeds brought from Korea and plants minari along the bank (minari is an East Asian herb that can grow almost anywhere). Over time the foreign plant takes root and flourishes in the fertile Arkansas soil. It’s a small piece of story so sweetly told and ripe with meaning. It ends up being one of the film’s most poignant metaphors while highlighting one of its many thoughtful themes.

With its emotionally textured story, captivating performances, and lived-in production design, “Minari” takes us on an immersive personal journey firmly anchored in the human experience. It’s a thoughtfully subdued film yet one bursting with naturalistic beauty. Within minutes I was caught up in Lee Isaac Chung’s clear-eyed true-to-life perspective and swept away by the aching rhythm which moves us from one scene to the next. I can’t quit thinking about it. Like I said, it really leaves its mark. “Minari” is scheduled for a limited release on December 11th ahead of its full release February 12, 2021.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

In 1939 24-year-old hotshot wunderkind Orson Welles was heavily courted by a struggling RKO Pictures. The studio signed Welles to a two-picture deal and gave him complete creative control including final cut privilege, something unheard of in the studio era. Welles began putting the idea together for what would become “Citizen Kane”. To help with the script Welles hired Herman J. Mankiewicz, a boozy, self-destructive and self-defined loose cannon believed by many in Hollywood to be washed up. Mankiewicz ended up winning an Academy Award for what many argue is the greatest film ever made.

In David Fincher’s “Mank” the acclaimed filmmaker both celebrates and admonishes Hollywood’s Golden Age through the character of Herman Mankiewicz, honing in on his time wrestling with his version of the “Citizen Kane” script. Fincher uses the same time-hopping techniques as Welles’ 1941 classic to visit key moments from Mankiewicz’s past which helped inspire and form pivotal elements of “Kane’s” story. “Mank” was originally conceived by David Fincher’s late father Jack Fincher who was inspired by Pauline Kael’s 50,000 word essay “Raising Kane” published in 1971.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

The opening shot feels plucked straight out of old Hollywood. It’s 1940. Two cars speed down a dusty California highway on their way to North Verde Ranch near Victorville. There Herman Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), bed-ridden with a broken leg following a car accident, sets up shop. He is given sixty days (originally 90 until Welles cut off a month) to complete his draft under the supervision of John Houseman (Sam Troughton). Helping is Rita Alexander (Lily Collins), a lightning fast British stenographer with a boatload of patience and a husband serving in the war effort overseas.

Fincher never stays in one place very long. The scenes at the ranch are frequently broken up with rapid-fire flashbacks that can be disorienting until you get a grasp on what the director is going for. We get a scene from 1930 where Mank (as Mankiewicz is affectionately called) meets and impresses newspaper mogul William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance), the inspiration for the Charles Foster Kane character. He also meets Hearst’s carefree and endearing mistress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried), a young actress who immediately takes a liking to Mank. In many ways their relationship is the heart of the film and its a really good turn from Seyfried.

Later Fincher takes us back in time to Paramount Studios to witness a hilarious brainstorm session in the writer’s room. Then we swing by MGM where blustering studio head Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) waxes not-so-eloquently about his movie philosophy before duping a group a employees with a ‘times are hard‘ speech. Fincher makes several of these studio stops through flashbacks landing some firm shots at their top-heavy structure but also admiring their vibrant creative energy. Each studio scene is richly textured, full of period detail and ambiance, and exquisitely captured through Eric Messerschmidt’s black-and-white cinematography.

More flashbacks show Mank giving himself over to booze and self-loathing, steadily losing his goodwill with studio heads and straining close relationships. Look no further than his exasperated wife Sara who is played by a terrific Tuppence Middleton working at just the right temperature. And then you have his unique friendship with the powerful Hearst which in many ways makes his eventual “Kane” script feel like something of a betrayal on top of being controversy. History tells us Hearst was enraged by “Citizen Kane”. Mankiewicz’s friendship with the mogul soured and Mank was tossed from Hearst’s social circles.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Fincher also uses Mank’s eyes to observe the 1934 California gubernatorial race between socialist Upton Sinclair and the conservative Republican incumbent Frank Merriam. Again we see many nuggets that not only influenced aspects of “Citizen Kane” but that also cut with a sharp present-day relevance. Backdoor politics, yellow journalism – its all here. Eventually everything meets at a combustible dinner party scene where Mank’s off-putting drunken monologue screeches things to a halt. It’s a big performance moment for Oldman who throughout the film captures every facet of Mankiewicz’s brilliant yet self-defeating personality. But the scene draws out too long and is too showy even for a movie as showy as this one.

“Mank” offers a very particular point-of-view on the longstanding debate over who wrote “Citizen Kane”. Much like Kael’s controversial and since discredited essay, Fincher is clearly sympathetic towards Herman Mankiewicz. He highlights Mank’s work while Orson Welles (portrayed by Tom Burke) mostly exists on the periphery of his story. But Fincher wisely doesn’t discount Welles’ contribution and ultimately his film is about more than just authorship. It’s an ambitious ode to a bygone Hollywood era. It’s a story about damaged genius and self-destruction. Above all it’s an applause-worthy celebration of the art of cinema – a visual and performance-rich delight. I was amazed yet unsure of it after one viewing. I was captivated and convinced after a second. “Mank” premieres today on Netflix.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

Sitting upon the endless red clay of northern Ghana is the village of Mamakrom and a school built on the very foundation of hope and compassion. The new documentary, understandably titled “Mamakrom”, is made with the same passion and solicitude as its namesake. Filmmakers Joseph Pelegreen and Matt Lang have put together something anchored by a heartfelt love for a struggling region and a genuine desire to see true and meaningful change.

“Mamakrom” showed at this year’s Hot Springs Documentary Film Festival and competed in the International Features category. The film is clearly a passion project and is imbued with the empathy and aspiration of its makers. It’s an eye-opening doc inspired by a decade’s worth of first-hand observation and experience. From the opening frames it’s clear this is something near and dear to hearts of those in front of and behind the cameras.

You could say “Mamakrom” is as educational as it is inspirational. Pelegreen (who serves as the film’s director) puts a lot of time into developing the setting and situation for his viewers. Through evocative imagery and the words of local workers for change, the film vividly captures the region’s abject poverty. It talks about famine and drought. It highlights the dangers of malaria and waterborne diseases in a place with limited access to healthcare. This directly connects to the most heartbreaking reality – the high mortality rate specifically among children.

With a clear-eyed perspective Pelegreen and Lang highlight the region’s most critical needs: health, development, and (the film’s biggest focus) education. “Educate a child and you’ll change his life forever.” But doing so in northern Ghana comes with its own set of intense challenges. The lack of infrastructure, the poor quality of the schoolhouses, the inability to find and maintain teachers – all of these things combined with the deeper health and quality of life struggles puts any aspiration of a burgeoning education system instantly behind the proverbial eight ball.

But one of the joys of “Mamakrom” is that it offers hope that even obstacles which seem insurmountable can be overcome by those willing to commit themselves and answer the call to action. This is embodied in the missions-based ESI Foundation (an acronym for Every Souls Important). The group has been a steady presence in Marakrom pouring time, money, and love into the children and their future. The film shows the fruits of the ESI’s investments – the construction of new school buildings, a library, and teachers quarters. More importantly, we get a taste of the impact they are having on the lives of the students. It’s all working towards building a better future for the people of Ghana, not through dependability but self-sustainability.

The film makes several other insightful observations, such as how the the aforementioned high mortality rate actually leads to a higher birth rate as families painfully try and compensate for the children they will inevitably lose. Or how the influx of used clothing and imported produce, though well-intended, has adverse effects on local markets. But while the health crisis is heartbreaking and the region’s economic complexities are compelling, the film always comes back to its faith-fueled hope of a better future for Ghanaians. “Mamakrom” doesn’t hide its intentions. It wants to open eyes and move people to action. And what better way to do that than by showing that such actions are not in vain.

“Mamakrom” is scheduled to show at several upcoming film festivals and it’s currently fielding offers for distribution.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

The dark and troubling relationship between Martin Luther King, Jr. and J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI is well known and has been well documented. But I’m not sure it has ever been as thoughtfully considered as it is in Sam Pollard’s new documentary “MLK/FBI”. I had the opportunity to see the film at this year’s Hot Springs Documentary Film Festival and it has been on my mind ever since.

Pollard’s film is timely considering the country’s current conversations about race relations and social justice. It’s equally fitting that it comes out during a time when the FBI is under scrutiny and face accusations of (once again) abusing their powers. I’m sure Pollard is aware of his film’s relevance, but he wisely lets it come through naturally, covering his subject from a clear-eyed historical perspective.

“MLK/FBI” uses two parallel but frequently intersecting timelines in its effort to chronicle Hoover’s evolving FBI and King’s rise as a civil rights leader. Pollard uses a fascinating collection of archived footage, audio recordings, and news feeds accompanied by insightful narration from a handful of authors, historians, former FBI agents, as well as a friend and speechwriter for Dr. King.

J. Edgar Hoover was the very first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and ran the organization for 37 years until his death in 1972. He served through a total of eight presidencies from Coolidge to Nixon. Under Hoover one of the the FBI’s chief undertakings was rooting out and exposing communists. Stanley Levison was a New York attorney with communist connections. He was also an advisor and friend to Dr. King which led Hoover to put his sights on the civil rights movement.

King was steadily growing in popularity and influence. His words of equality resonated with African-Americans across the country culminating with the famous March on Washington in August 28, 1963. Two days later the FBI’s head of domestic intelligence would deem King “the most dangerous Negro in the future of this nation from the standpoint of communism.” A year later and with the permission of Attorney General Bobby Kennedy, Hoover began wiretapping King, compiling countless tapes of private conversations and uncovering numerous adulterous affairs. While his actions were morally repugnant, King did nothing illegal so the Bureau put together a smear campaign aimed at staining the leader’s reputation.

Pollard’s examination isn’t exhaustive nor can it be considering the tapes connecting King and the FBI are sealed in a National Archives vault until February 2027. But what he does do is construct a strong moral case against the FBI’s targeting of King while also using the flimsiness of their communist ties claims to reveal far more troubling motivations. Hoover’s cooperation with the Kennedy’s and Lyndon Johnson adds an even darker shade to their political power and influence.

But at the same time Pollard doesn’t sugarcoat King’s transgressions. If the FBI was eager to create their own smoking gun, King’s extra-marital affairs provided them with the bullet. “MLK/FBI” challenges the almost saintly mythos surrounding Dr. King today while still showing him as the victim of a concentrated effort by the government’s principal law enforcement agency to discredit and silence not only him, but the entire civil rights movement. The film ends by posing a thought-provoking question – does an individual’s personal sins negate their work as a leader and their voice for change?

With “MLK/FBI” Sam Pollard merges history with cinema to reconstruct the often contentious relationship between the United States government and one of nation’s most iconic leaders. For better or for worse the film’s clinical, just-the-facts approach can feel a lot like a history lesson. And it does veer ever so slightly into conspiracy theory territory when speaking of King’s assassination. But Pollard doesn’t linger on the unknown. His film is about examining what we do know, highlighting the abuse of federal power to thwart a powerful national movement. The rest will have to wait until 2027.

“MLK/FBI” is appearing in several North American festivals before its scheduled release in January 2021.

VERDICT – 4 STARS