Three movies I haven’t seen receive mini-reviews below—because others have done the work for us. Each film in some way takes on social issues.
I. ‘Mother!’ Is the Worst Movie of the Year, Maybe Century. Rex Reed, New York Observer
Although you can already tell from his title how Rex Reed feels about Mother!, here’s more to chew on:
…an exercise in torture and hysteria so over the top that I didn’t know whether to scream or laugh out loud. Stealing ideas from Polanski, Fellini and Kubrick, [director Darren Aronofsky has] jerrybuilt an absurd Freudian nightmare that is more wet dream than bad dream, with the subtlety of a chainsaw.
This delusional freak show is two hours of pretentious twaddle that tackles religion, paranoia, lust, rebellion, and a thirst for blood in a circus of grotesque debauchery to prove that being a woman requires emotional sacrifice and physical agony at the cost of everything else in life, including life itself. That may or may not be what Aronofsky had in mind, but it comes as close to a logical interpretation as any of the other lunk-headed ideas I’ve read or heard. The reviews, in which a group of equally pretentious critics frustratingly search for a deeper meaning, are even nuttier than the film itself. Using descriptions like ‘hermeneutic structure,’ ‘phantasmagoric fantasia,’ ‘cinematic Rorschach test’ and ‘extended scream of existential rage,’ they sure know how to leave you laughing.
There are enough counter-opinions from critics, though, to satisfy the “insanity”-seeking Aronofsky fans as well. One example is from Steve Pond, The Wrap: “For its combination of ambition and audacity, this is a glorious piece of cinematic insanity.” Another, Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: “It’s worth seeing — if you don’t mind a little insanity in escapism that offers no escape, only the promise of a new fairy tale on another page.”
II. ‘Battle of the Sexes’ Review: Imagine Hillary and Trump Swinging Rackets. Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
Or does the actual historical account provide more interest? A few reviews:
Linda Holmes, NPR:
The film focuses on [Billie Jean] King’s activism for prize money parity in professional tennis, meaning sexism was not, for her, only about pride. Bobby Riggs may have been a sideshow, but he — and the people he riled up with his antics — had the potential to slow down women’s tennis in its push for equality.
King’s ambivalence and reluctance, and her understanding that the position she found herself in as an advocate had the capacity to paint her into a corner, are the best parts…
Leah Greenblatt, ew.com: “The symbolic power of what happened there – one small step, one giant leap for womankind – is still the movie’s truest ace.”
However….Dana Stevens, Slate: “Forty-four years after that legendary game, with the No. 1 chauvinist pig in the White House, ‘You’ve come a long way, baby’ is starting to feel like fake news.”
III. Tired of superheroes? ‘Wonder Woman’ is here to save the day. Moira Macdonald, Seattle Times
States film critic Macdonald, “It’s nice to think that love — and strong women — can save the world; it’s invigorating to watch it happen, even if it’s just on a movie screen.”
Wonder Woman, now on DVD, was quite intriguing to Hillary Clinton, she professed before seeing it. And afterward she stated that it was “just as inspirational as I’d suspected a movie about a strong, powerful woman in a fight to save the world from international disaster would be.”
Male reviewers also generally appreciated this “superhero movie that runs on estrogen rather than testosterone” (Peter Howell, Toronto Star). Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: “What lingers…is the feeling of hope that the movie brings, that it someday might be possible for female rationality to defeat male brutality.”