ArminCallo-PalmSprings

WOW! Just saw what may be the best film of the year – Barry Jenkin's MOONLIGHT. Delicate, lyrical, and movingly cinematic, it is a visual poem. It takes its time, and feels very "independent." Although the dialogue is terrific, the narrative thrust is completely cinematic, visual. And while character driven, the film poses big, weighty, universal themes like Identity, Sexuality, Masculinity, Family, and Community. (And yes, the initial Caps are intended.) MOONLIGHT is urgent social commentary that feels unbearably personal. It is a masterpiece from that dizzying, disorienting opening shot (with cinematic "look-ma-no-hands" bravado) to that delicately intimate close. The camera work, the musical score, the screenplay, the performances are all top-notch. These are the big stuff. But the small details are so skillfully delivered that they are simply breathtaking: the spiritual baptism of teaching a boy to swim; the loving preparation of a meal; the feel of sand on skin; and the blue-glow of moonlight reflected on black shoulders. Each shot – each one allegorical – beautifully rendered. I LOVED IT.

This was an extremely likable film. A funny, lighthearted mocumentary that will not offend anyone. (The film's mildness and utter correctness reminds me of the effects of genetic in-breeding of royal families, producing respectable, yet bland, monarchs.) That is both its best, and worst, quality. The idea for the film's narrative is so out-of-this-world that it is surprising to learn that it stemmed out of real events for the films co-creators. Like they say, fact is stranger than fiction.

The film is an extremely fun ride. I loved the documentary-style camera-work they achieved for the film: on-the-fly shots; off-kilter framing; shaky hand-held panning; and supposedly off-the-cuff set- ups. This not only permeates the mocumentary itself, we see it as an outrageous sendup at the start of the film when the royally- commissioned documentary is being made before the chaos starts. Loved the valet with the lint remover -- "ok, let's do it again."

(2) Score the different elements of the film objectively, 1 to 4, and explain your ratings.

Script/Story: 3 - excellent narrative. Loved the mocumentary conceit; the wacky travel log; the delightful Balkan country folk, from the sexy Ana with her tasting finger to the blind-tasting Yogurt crew. And am particularly delighted to learn that the co- writers/co-directors simply wrote a skeletal narrative structure and pretty much had the people casts play themselves!

Cinematography/Visual Effects: 2.5, fun. See my comment above re camera-work

Editing: 2; needs to be somewhat sharper. Loved the intimate, long-lasting shots of the King in deep contemplation. Very effective for the meaning of the film.

Sound Effects: 2, adequate

Musical Score: 1; enough of Grieg's "Peer Gynt Suite"

Performances: 2.5; I particularly loved the blandness, elegance and nobility from the actor portraying the King. Extremely measured, he showed a genuine interest in people, goodness, and doing the right thing. Wish all royals were this way.

Production Design: Sets, Locations, Costumes, etc.: 2.5; the Balkans looked fun, fitting the narrative.

(3) Would you recommend this movie to a friend? Give your reasons.

Yes, a very entertaining film and quite well made. My favorite fact about this film comes from the director's comment that the best way to comment on today's tumultuous political climate is through humor. Thumbs up.

I loved this film classic, and after seeing it, I can understand why both Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola were so influenced by it. It is remarkably shot. The following scenes will stay within my cinematic consciousness for a long while: (a) the church scene with the upside-down Christ; (b) the Communist official's assassination scene with the fireworks; (c) the long, reflective bar table with the lit shot glasses; (d) the hotel staircase scene immediately preceding the assassination with the myriad of graphic patterns across the screen on the walls, the floor, etc.; (e) the drunk man's "crowd attack" with the fire extinguisher at the banquet table; (f) the ending dance/dirge at daybreak. The cinematography really reminded me of the work of Gregg Toland in CITIZEN KANE. In fact, as in KANE, almost all of ASHES & DIAMONDS' interior scenes were shot with the camera very low, or even under the floorboards, where the ceilings were always visible. The cinematography was fantastic!

I liked the narrative structure also; however, I can understand one's confusion given the complex WWII political structure of Poland, the Communist, the Germans, etc. But, subtracting the political undertones of the narrative, I found that the film raised compelling issues of courage, conscience, heritage, and pride. Loved the fact that the main character -- deemed "the James Dean of Poland" -- after falling in love with the barmaid now wants to chance his mind and abandon the Polish Resistance. Only he can't because of his pride, his conscience, his colleague's challenge, or his fate.

Loved the film's use of symbols and images: (a) the cross and Christ figures; (b) heat, and flames, and fire, all components of ashes and diamonds; (c) flowers and violets, from the small girl at the start offering the violets to the icon/altar above the church door at the start to the violets of the Barmaid and even violets eventually thrown in the trash; (d) the main character's dark glasses which symbolize his obscured vision, or that of the Polish Resistance or the Communists?

Love the musical score. It was grand and operatic, and can be easily seen in Martin Scorsese's and Francis Ford Coppola's works.

Loved the acting. The chemistry between the two leads was extremely believable. The rest of the cast was excellent as well.

Score Grid --

Script/Story: 4

Cinematography/Visual Effect: 4+

Editing: 3.5

Sound/Musical Score: 4

Production Design: 4+

Acting/Performance: 4

How good was the film objectively? Strong & Weak Points –

See my comments above. Weakest point of the film was the editing. Could be cut sharper, cleaner.

Worst, of course, was the quality of the print at the Festival. Shameful for such a b/w classic at a major festival venue.

Recommend the film?

Absolutely. Required for any lover of film and film history for the reasons noted above.