Gloria (2013)

This was an exercise in watching the same movie in a different language with different actors. For me, it was basically the same. Except they don't use the English-language version of Gloria. Paulina Garcia is great but I felt like the tone was different in Spanish. It wasn't as funny in Spanish, or maybe I didn't get the humor in Spanish. That's probably on me.

Gloria Bell (2018)

I am familiar with La Mujer Fantastica, which has a similar use of light and the same enchanting use of music. That was my favorite part. Gloria Bell is a remake of the Chilean film Gloria that I hear is exactly the same, frame for frame, song for song, same crew and all.  I haven't seen the original but I don't really understand why this was necessary except as a vehicle for Julianne Moore. She is excellent and quite funny in a role that is rare for an actress of her age but that's beside the point. Did the director feel compelled to remake his own film in English? Is he saying something about universality?  Was an American audience not willing to watch a more culturally specific movie? Are older white singles really into Earth, Wind and Fire?

A Fantastic Woman (La Mujer Fantastica) (2017)

I saw this fabulous movie on a plane. I like to watch foreign movies on planes because otherwise foreign films are sometimes hard to find with subtitles. Daniela Vega is absolutely phenomenal. The story is a heartbreaking tale of a trans woman in Chile not being permitted to grieve the greatest loss of her life. But she is fierce and does not give up in the face of insults, humiliation, and physical assault. And there is this brilliant, surreal dance interlude in the middle.

Neruda (2016)

Neruda is a really interesting take on the biopic genre. It pits the titular Colombian poet (who lived a fascinating life) against the inspector chasing after him for the anti-Communist government. Here's the question, what is history and what is a story? Much of the production design leads you to believe that they are living out a story--the obvious moving backdrop (make no mistake, it was not just a budgetary restraint, every choice was made quite purposefully: the Senate meeting in the bathroom, the quick changes of scenery, and the cinematographic coloring). Gael Garcia Bernal may have top billing, but is he the main character? He does not play Neruda, but the inspector. Is he merely a supporting character in the life of Neruda? He fights for himself to be the protagonist of his own story. The climactic escape scene through the snowy Andes Mountain pass is wonderfully cinematic. It gave me an ominous McTeague kind of feeling, though it doesn't quite end like that. It does look like the snowy landscape of The Hateful Eight. I love Bernal in everything he does. This is no exception.

Jackie (2016)

Natalie Portman is just divine. I'm glad she made this triumphant return to serious films. Jackie Kennedy created this fairy tale of Camelot quite brilliantly ex post facto. I actually didn't know how the Camelot analogy came about, but now I do and it's a fascinating study of a grieving woman with a legacy to think about. And Portman plays the part as regal as we imagine Camelot, helped immensely by the gorgeous, glamorous costumes of the 60s. She speaks just like Jackie Kennedy. It's in fact so spot on with the cadence and rise and fall of her voice that it's kind of annoying.  Her regular speech was very breathy like a whisper. Portman is poised and always in control, even when in a vulnerable grieving state. She strictly instructs the journalist on what he is to publish. There is a great philosophical/theological scene with a priest in which we see Jackie in a different position. It is perhaps the only moment she is not in the power position. She listens to him, and genuinely takes what he has to say with authority.

The breathy voice along with the beautiful score by Mica Levi is haunting. It's the perfect word to describe the tone of the movie. The cello is a pretty haunting instrument and the dissonance, from the very first notes at the beginning of the film, give it a creepy vibe. The fantastic use of the Camelot soundtrack contributes to the eerie aura surrounding the Kennedy legacy. The camera is often uncomfortably close to the face. Grief up close is discomfiting. We literally get an intimate look at her.

The story centers around the week following JFK's assassination. There are several flashbacks weaved seamlessly into the plot. It shouldn't work, but this disconnected storytelling does work. The interview with the journalist is used as a vehicle for the flashbacks. There is a very authentic look to the White House Tour and some of the other seemingly archival footage. It is a story that makes you think about legacy. What is legacy? How is it formed? How is it manipulated? And what did JFK do? Our remembrance of JFK is very much colored by the aftermath of his assassination. Thanks, Jackie.