This Guy at the Movies

All the familiar ingredients are there to make “Fallen Leaves” (in Finnish, “Kuolleet lehdet,” literally “Dead Leaves”) (Finnish/German; 2023; rom-com-dram; running time 1 hour, 21 minutes; written and directed by Aki Kaurismäki; N/R; released at Cannes Film Festival on May 22, 2023, available on streaming and VOD services, including Amazon Prime Video and Mubi) just another throwaway romantic comedy (with, of course, some drama to keep things grounded). Lonely but likeable people, an awkward meetup, fate intervening, a lost phone number, fate intervening again, romantic ups and downs, cold feet, misunderstandings, a breakup, a serious health scare and even a cute dog. Sounds like standard, cheesy rom-com stuff. But in many ways “Fallen Leaves,” Finland’s submission for the Best International Film Academy Award, is the anti-rom-com. For starters, Kaurismäki’s 20th feature film is decidedly unglamorous. You won’t find spacious beachside homes (or even beaches), private jets or runway-worthy fashion here. The female lead doesn’t look like a model; the male lead isn’t wealthy and in fact can’t hold a job. And this isn’t your standard happy, laugh aloud, maybe even cheer romantic story. Our female love interest doesn’t crack a real smile until about 75 minutes into an 81-minute film. Instead, dry humor abounds as two lost souls clinging to barely enough hope to face their mundane daily existences try desperately to find a sliver of humanity and connection in another being.

Set in current day Helsinki, Ansa (Alma Pöysti) is a young adult woman who lives alone in a drab, barely furnished apartment, where she spends most of her time listening to radio reports about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. She works at a grocery but is fired for taking home expired food; then gets a job washing dishes and bussing tables at a bar before it is shut down when the owner is busted for selling drugs; and lands a job in a factory. Holappa (Jussi Vatanen) is a 30-something man who works as a sandblaster and frequently drinks on the job. He is injured at work but fired for failing a breathalyzer test, then loses a construction job for drinking while on a worksite. Ansa and Holappa first cross paths on karaoke night at a local pub but are too shy to talk. Their next encounter is when Ansa finds Holappa (she recognizes him) passed out drunk at a bus stop. They finally converse when Holappa arrives at the bar where Ansa was working just as the owner is being busted. They have an awkward date. When Ansa gives Holappa her number, he immediately loses it. They will cross paths again, and though the romance isn’t obvious, they share an attraction and perhaps desperation. Holappa’s drinking will become an issue. In the meantime, Ansa takes in a stray dog. Will a near-death experience spell the end of their slow-burn romance? Or will it strengthen their bond? Your money should be on the latter.

The humor in “Fallen Leaves” is of the droll, subtle variety. No one in the cast is playing for rimshots. Instead, Kaurismäki’s script and the actors’ performances produce gentle laughs in the small moments, like when Holappa and co-worker Huotari (Janne Hyytiäinen) needle each other. Or when Ansa and her friend Liisa (Nuppu Koivu) are talking and Lissa says, “All men are swine,” to which Ansa replies, “No they’re not. Swine are intelligent and sympathetic.” Or when two moviegoers who have just watched the 2019 American zombie comedy “The Dead Don’t Die” compare it to Robert Bresson’s 1951 French drama about an outcast man of the cloth, “Diary of a Country Priest.” Though this in no way resembles a Meg Ryan or Hallmark rom-com, it does hinge on our potential romantic couple being likeable, and in their own odd ways, Holappa and Ansa are. You’ll want them to find love because both desperately need life to take a positive turn. Those used to garden variety American rom-coms are likely to find this too dry, too drab, too slow. But “Fallen Leaves” is a reminder that even those who aren’t rich and beautiful and riding in stretch limos also long for and deserve to love and be loved.

My score: 80 out of 100

Not random thoughts, but well-organized (I hope) ones after having seen “Godzilla Minus One” (Japanese; 2023; sci-fi/action; run time 2 hours, 5 minutes; written and directed by Takashi Yamazaki; rated PG-13 for creature violence and action; in theaters Dec. 1, 2023) a third time, this go-round the black-and-white version (aka “Godzilla Minus One/Minus Color”) that is back in U.S. theaters for a week.

• Seeing a movie multiple times, especially while still new and in theaters, is a revealing experience. A movie either stands up to repeated viewings or it doesn’t. When David Fincher’s “Gone Girl” arrived in October 2014, I saw it three (maybe four?) times. And it didn’t reach a point of diminishing returns even though I knew the twists in a story awash with gasp-worthy twists. It still holds up even though I have watched it upwards of 20 times. I recently saw “Poor Things” a second time in a theater, and though some aspects of the movie didn’t blow me away like they did the first time, I found other elements (like the performances of Ramy Youssef and Kathryn Hunter) to be entertaining in ways I didn’t initially notice. When “May December” was on Netflix in December, I raved about how great it was but then revisited it, and it felt like it had gone from an A-plus to an A-minus. Through three viewings of “Godzilla Minus One,” I’m still as excited and entertained by it as I was the first time. I find myself so engrossed in the story (even though it is familiar now) that my mind doesn’t have time to try and pick it apart. I thought it was a remarkable movie the first time, and I thought the same the second and third times.
• Not sure why this didn’t register until the third viewing, but the lead performance by Ryunosuke Kamiki is Oscar-level stuff and is the backbone of the movie. Kamiki plays Koichi Shikishima, a World War II kamikaze pilot who shirks his duty and lands his plane on a military service island, where he witnesses an attack by a heretofore unseen amphibious creature called Godzilla. Shikishima returns to Tokyo to find it destroyed by U.S. bombing raids and his family dead. Labeled a coward and stricken with guilt and PTSD, he, like the rest of Japan, sets about to start life over. After a chance encounter, he lives with a young woman (Minami Hamabe as Noriko Oishi) who is caring for an orphaned child. Shikishima lands work that eventually will lead him to be part of the effort to stop Godzilla from destroying a nation trying to rebuild. Shikishima will get a second chance to be a hero. Kamiki is brilliant as he plays a tormented man who still has flashbacks but is driven to make amends. In one scene, Shikishima witnesses one of Godzilla’s attacks, one that presumably has killed Noriko. When Shikishima falls to his knees crying and then lets out all  of his pent-up emotions with a scream, it is spine-tingling.
• If anything, Godzilla is more menacing without color. When he looks directly into the camera, it’s as if he is looking at the audience, and it is terrifying even from the safety of an American theater. Toho Studios, seizing on the surprising popularity of “Godzilla Minus One” (it recently surpassed $100 million at the box office worldwide), released “Minus Color” in celebration of the 70^th anniversary of the first Godzilla movie. The colorless version (and the studio did more than take out the color; the black-and-white version has been judicially toned) emphasizes the era (post-WWII) and heightens the story’s considerable drama.
• I have told others that “Godzilla Minus One” is a great movie, and I don’t mean just a great Godzilla movie. It stands up to (and exceeds) most everything that was shown in a theater 2023. I’m not sure people believe me when I tell them that. Perhaps in their minds (especially if they are older) Godzilla movies mean a guy in a rubber suit stomping all over model cityscapes viewed on a small screen on a black-and-white TV late at night. Those who dismiss the most recent Godzilla movie are doing themselves a disservice. One stretch of “Godzilla Minus One” is so stunningly good as to defy description. From the character development drama (which would have made a great standalone movie) to a “Jaws”-like scene in which Godzilla gives chase to a rickety old wooden boat, to Godzilla decimating Ginza with an atomic ray is simply a breathtaking stretch of filmmaking. And it was just as breathtaking the third time around.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Tuesday announced the nominations for the Academy Awards for films released in 2023. The Oscars will be handed out to the winners on March 10 in Hollywood. Here’s a look at the nominees in the big six categories (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress) with my gut-reaction predictions of the winners, what my vote would be, and a few comments.

BEST PICTURE

“American Fiction,” “Anatomy of a Fall,” “Barbie,” “The Holdovers,” “Killers of the Flower Moon,” “Maestro,” “Oppenheimer,” “Past Lives,” “Poor Things,” “The Zone of Interest”

And the winner is … “Oppenheimer.”

My vote: “Poor Things”

What I think: While this is an exceptionally strong and varied field, this is a two-horse race between the favorite and “Killers of the Flower Moon.” Anything else would be surprising if not shocking.

BEST DIRECTOR

Justine Triet, “Anatomy of a Fall”; Martin Scorsese, “Killers of the Flower Moon”; Christopher Nolan, “Oppenheimer”; Yorgos Lanthimos, “Poor Things”; Jonathan Glazer, “The Zone of Interest”

And the winner is … Nolan

My vote: Nolan

What I think: Most of the talk in this category will be about “Barbie” director Greta Gerwig not getting a nomination. Scorsese has a shot and would be a popular choice. Triet, the only female among the nominees, would be a worthy winner.

BEST ACTOR

Bradley Cooper, “Maestro”; Colman Domingo, “Rustin”; Paul Giamatti, “The Holdovers”; Cillian Murphy, “Oppenheimer”; Jeffrey Wright, “American Fiction”

And the winner is … Giamatti.

My vote: Giamatti

What I think: Giamatti would be a popular pick, and with a couple of awards already in hand, he would appear to be the favorite but not a lock. It’s wide-open after him. It’s nice to see Wright, largely a supporting player throughout a lengthy career, get a nod for a leading role.

BEST ACTRESS

Annette Bening, “Nyad”; Lily Gladstone, “Killers of the Flower Moon”; Sandra Hüller, “Anatomy of a Fall”; Carey Mulligan, “Maestro”; Emma Stone, “Poor Things”

And the winner is … Gladstone.

My vote: Stone

What I think: Stone is the obvious choice, and she is brilliant in a challenging role. But this feels like an upset brewing. Gladstone would become the first Native American to win an Oscar in the acting categories, and the Academy likes firsts. Margot Robbie, for “Barbie,” is a surprising omission in the year’s most popular movie.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Sterling K. Brown, “American Fiction”; Robert De Niro, “Killers of the Flower Moon”; Robert Downey Jr., “Oppenheimer”; Ryan Gosling, “Barbie”; Mark Ruffalo, “Poor Things”

And the winner is … Downey

My vote: Ruffalo

What I think: This seems like it has been Downey’s award since “Oppenheimer” opened in theaters. But Brown and Ruffalo would be worthy winners in memorable roles, and Gosling was fantastic as Ken in “Barbie.” Perhaps voters try to make up for Gerwig’s and Robbie’s snubs here.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Emily Blunt, “Oppenheimer”; Danielle Brooks, “The Color Purple”; America Ferrera, “Barbie”; Jodie Foster, “Nyad”; Da’Vine Joy Randolph, “The Holdovers”

And the winner is … Randolph

My vote: Randolph

What I think: Golden Globe winner Randolph would appear to be the favorite, with Foster a close second. The latter would be the sentimental pick; she already has two Oscars, but they came in 1989 (Best Actress for “The Accused”) and 1992 (Best Actress for “The Silence of the Lambs”).

Thirty seconds into “Founders Day” (American; 2024; slasher horror/political satire; running time 1 hour, 46 minutes; directed by Erik Bloomquist, written by Erik Bloomquist and Carson Bloomquist; rated R for language, strong bloody violence, some sexual references; in theaters Jan. 19, 2024) and it had made its awfulness abundantly clear. The best that could be hoped for from there was that this would be so bad as to be good, and at times it is. And at other times it is just terrible. And it’s terrible more than it’s entertainingly bad. Jumbled tones, cringey dramatic moments, 1990s slasher movie clichés, so-so gore, laughable performances and a dragging pace combine to make this barely watchable. Barely. A decent twist and the revealing of a concept that should have made for a better film (especially by January release horror standards) are far too little far too late.

A small unnamed town is shaken by a series of gruesome killings in the days leading up to a mayoral election. High school senior Allison Chambers (Naomi Grace) watches in horror as her romantic partner (Olivia Nikkanen as Melissa Faulkner) is beaten on a bridge by a killer wearing a mask and powdered wig and brandishing a gavel before throwing her in the river below. More killings follow and tensions rise when the incumbent mayor (Amy Hargreaves as Blair Gladwell) decides to move forward with the city’s Founders Day celebration even though the first victim is the daughter of her challenger, a Trump-like Harold Faulkner (Jayce Bartok). What person or persons is behind the killings? That’s for the sweet-toothed police commissioner (Catherine Curtin) and her top deputy (Adam Weppler) to unravel.

The shifting tones can be traced to this: About half the cast seems to be playing this for pure laughs, and the other half must have thought they were making “Oppenheimer.” Curtin and Bartok are cartoony over-the-top, but their inept performances are funnier than the alleged satirical humor. Bartok is especially awful in a largely missed opportunity to mock Trump. Instead, his character hints at Trump-isms that are overshadowed by Bartok’s alleged acting. Grace is good in what amounts to the lead role in a too large ensemble, but her efforts are wasted in the misguided dramatic moments (especially one with her father, Andrew Stewart-Jones as Thomas Chambers, in which there is a failed attempt to inject sentimentality). Much of the violence happens off camera, though one scene in which the killer carves up a character’s face with a knife hidden in the handle of the gavel is suitably grotesque. “Founders Day” doesn’t get around to stating its political intentions until the final scenes. By then you will have alternated between laughing/sighing/cursing at the ridiculousness of what you are watching and being ready for it to end already.

My score: 19 out of 100

“I.S.S.” (American; 2023; science fiction/drama/thriller; running time 1 hour, 35 minutes; directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite, written by Nick Shafir; rated R for some violence and language; released at the Tribeca Festival on June 12, 2023, in theaters Jan. 19, 2024) is a nail-biting single-location outer space drama about how loyalty, duty and cooperation are tested when six lives and possibly the future of humanity are at stake. Those in the small cast deliver worthy performances, shouldering much of the load in a film that includes only brief (but intense and effective) flourishes of action. Not much here qualifies as inventive (critics have noted similarities to “Alien”); some of the CGI is spotty in a modestly budgeted (a reported $13.8 million) movie; and the script too often signals its intentions, as nearly every moment and every line foreshadows what is to come. But “I.S.S.” delivers edge-of-your-seat drama that will make you glad you aren’t confined to a small craft in outer space with people you don’t know or trust.

Set in the near future, a crew of three Americans (Chris Messina as Commander Gordon Barrett, Ariana DeBose as Dr. Kira Foster and John Gallagher Jr. as Christian Campbell) and three Russians (Maria Mashkova as Weronika Vetrov, Costa Ronin as Nicholai Pulov and Pilou Asbaek as Alexey Pulov) are stationed together on the International Space Station. They get along well and are about as comfortable as anyone could be in space. They marvel at the Earth below them, noting that boundaries disappear when viewed from so far away. Foster, who has just arrived on the space station, takes a break to observe Earth and notices what at first seem like volcanic eruptions. But the situation is much more dire than that. The crew leaders from each nation are given secret orders – take control of the space station by whatever means possible. Will the respective crews execute their orders? Will a romance between two of them make the situation stickier? Can the astronauts and cosmonauts trust each other? Can anyone be trusted? Will the space station maintain its orbit given the distracting chaos back on Earth?

Screen time is divided almost equally among the six actors, but DeBose’s Foster, a young, idealistic researcher who has her reasons for wanting to be on the space station, is the main character. Messina’s Barrett and Mashkova’s Vetrov are central to the loyalty conflict, blurring the lines between the rival nations. Gallagher has the showiest part, as his Campbell is the edgiest of the characters and the most affected by the situation. The audience knows that the Americans have been given orders to take the space station. But did the Russians get the same orders? As tension builds, violence follows, and it is brief but brutal. The lack of gravity makes for oddly beautiful moments during the physical confrontations, as blood beads up and floats like small red bubbles. Director Cowperthwaite and writer Shafir introduced multiple complications, with some more interesting than others. The tension bubbles under the early moments even when all is well, and it builds to a nerve-racking crescendo in a scene in which Campbell keeps a close eye on a knife he is using while nonchalantly making a sandwich. Typically not much is expected of modestly budgeted January releases. “I.S.S.” might not play in front of many sets of eyes during the cold winter months. But it deserves to be seen.

My score: 79 out of 100.

“Beau Travail” (in English, “Good Work”) (French; 1999; drama; running time 1 hour, 32 minutes; directed by Claire Denis, written by Denis and Jean-Pol Fargeau, based loosely on the 1888 novella “Billy Budd” by Herman Melville; N/R but includes brief violence; released at Venice International Film Festival on Sept. 4, 1999, available on streaming and VOD services) is visual poetry with minimal dialogue and maximum subtext. Nothing happens, per se, in the usual sense, except for a couple of brief flourishes. The story is contained in the thoughts, emotions and subtle actions of its characters and the camera’s gaze. Much of its reputation – it was ranked at No. 7 in Sight and Sound’s 2022 list of the greatest films of all-time, up from No. 78 on the 2012 list, no doubt thanks in large part to diversification of the panel of voters – is based on its strange and memorable ending. Whether it has entertainment value is debatable. That would depend on how you define cinematic entertainment.

“Beau Travail” is told from the point of view (and with narration from) of Adjudant-Chef Galoup (Denis Lavant), reflecting on the time he spent in brutally hot Djibouti (on the horn of Africa) leading a section of men in the French Foreign Legion. Galoup’s superior is Commandant Bruno Forestier (Michel Subor), an older, quiet man who questions his own motives for being involved in the legion but cares deeply for his men. Galoup both admires and is resentful of the commandant. Galoup also, inexplicably, is hostile toward recruit Sentain (Grégoire Colin). The men undergo rigorous training and perform menial tasks; they spring into action only when a helicopter crashes in the sea near them. When one of the legionnaires abandons his post briefly, Galoup punishes him by making him dig a deep hole during the heat of the day. Sentain tries to give water to his fellow legionnaire, but Galoup slaps it away. Sentain punches Galoup, and Galoup retaliates by taking Sentain into the desert and ordering him to walk back to the base. Sentain never returns and is presumed dead (though locals have rescued him), and Commandant Forestier tells Galoup he will be court-martialed and that his days in the legion are over.

The most overt message in “Beau Travail” is provided by the ending that follows. While in Djibouti, Galoup had a girlfriend, a young local woman with whom he would go dancing in a nightclub. Denis throughout her film sprinkles scenes of young women dancing to disco music. But in the closing scene, it’s just Galoup on the dance floor, gyrating wildly and stopping only to take drags on his cigarette. He is finally free of the shackles of military’s discipline, rigid hierarchy and restrictive masculinity. Lavant’s dancing is almost hypnotic. “Beau Travail” is told through the director’s female gaze, with all sorts of homoerotic implications. Nothing in the film is overtly gay, though in one scene Commandant Forestier listens to a legionnaire tell a story about how he was abandoned by his parents and found in a stairway, and Forestier tells him, “At least it was a beautiful find.” Instead Denis shows the men, shirtless, digging up ground. And, shirtless, participating in a training exercise in which the men repeatedly bear-hug each other. And, shirtless, ironing their shirts, which seems kind of pointless since they rarely wear them. It’s never clear whether Galoup’s resentment of his commandant and Sentain is based on. Was he secretly attracted to them? Little in “Beau Travail” is explained, clearly by design, with Denis allowing the audience to fill in the blanks while gazing at the beautiful (if deadly) African scenery … and shirtless dudes. If that’s your thing.

My score: 75 out of 100

“American Fiction”

Genre: Comedy/drama

Country: American

Directed by: Cord Jefferson

Written by: Jefferson, based on the 2001 novel “Erasure” by Percival Everett

Starring: Jeffrey Wright, Tracee Ellis Ross, Issa Rae, Sterling K. Brown, John Ortiz, Erika Alexander, Leslie Uggams, Adamy Brody, Keith David, Okieriete Onaodowan, Myra Lucretia Taylor, Raymond Anthony Thomas, Miriam Shor, Michael Cyril Creighton, J.C. MacKenzie, Patrick Fischler, Ryan Richard Doyle

Rated: R for some drug use, brief violence, sexual references, language throughout

Run time: 1 hour, 57 minutes

Release date: In limited theaters Dec. 15, 2023

Where I saw it: Kan-Kan Cinema and Restaurant on the near eastside of Indianapolis on a Saturday afternoon, $13, about 20 other people in the theater

What it’s about: A Black West Coast author (Wright as Thelonious “Monk” Ellison) who is struggling to find a publisher for his latest work returns home to Boston to deal with family with whom he has a tenuous relationship and decides to, as a joke, use the pen name Stagg R. Leigh to write a book, “My Pafology,” that panders to a largely White audience by emphasizing exaggerated Black stereotypes. The book becomes a highly praised best-seller, and Monk must handle the consequences.

What I liked about it: “American Fiction” is a frequently hilarious satirical take on the state of race in the U.S. (and in the publishing and filmmaking worlds in particular) that also seamlessly melds the humor with riveting drama about a well-to-do family dealing with trauma, past and present. Jefferson, making his feature film debut, isn’t subtle with his messaging, and most of the time that approach pays off with resounding results. As Wright’s Monk often hears from White publishers and filmmakers who are a little too enthusiastic about his purposely pandering book, the message here needs to be made, even if it is an uncomfortable one that won’t necessarily resonate with the people it needs to reach. … Wright, who has enjoyed a lengthy career based mostly on supporting roles, is terrific as the lead. His Monk is struggling with anger issues, the source of which he refuses to acknowledge. Then he is thrust into a daunting situation, caring for his aging mother (Uggams as Anges Ellison) and trying to rekindle relationships with his sister (Ross as Lisa) and brother (Brown as Clifford), the latter of which is battling for acceptance. While they are dealing with past trauma, tragedy strikes in a film that never reveals where it might be going until becoming more predictable in the final act. Jefferson gets strong performances from the entire cast, but Brown is among the standouts, and the scenes in which his Clifford and Monk confront old resentments are the most touching in the film. Wright’s Monk has a lot on his plate, including a blossoming relationship with an attorney (Alexander as Coraline), and the audience will want Monk to find peace and happiness. Similarly, “American Fiction” covers a lot of ground but never feels too cluttered.

What I didn’t like about it: The movie loses momentum as it goes along, and the family drama portion starts feeling much stronger than the satirical look at race and the publishing industry. “American Fiction” would have been fine, maybe even better, if it concluded with the first apparent ending, but Jefferson offers up two other endings in a meta sequence. … A scene in which the film delves into fantasy, albeit briefly, is jolting when it arrives and feels out of place. … Even given that this is satire, the White people in the film are cartoonishly clueless, much like how some feminist films reduce men to cartoonishly evil stereotypes. A message often has more impact if you just let the bad characters be bad without making them too over the top and obvious.

Who it will appeal to: Largely the White liberals it mocks but also general audiences who enjoy compelling family drama and satire that is both funny and biting

My score: 85 out of 100

You might recall the story (or at least the more sensationalistic parts of it) told in “Society of the Snow” (in Spanish, “La sociedad de la nieve”) (Spanish/Uruguayan/Chilean; 2023; historical survival drama/thriller; running time 2 hours, 24 minutes; directed by J.A. Bayona, written by Bayona, Bernat Vilaplana, Jaime Marques and Nicolás Casariego, based on the 2009 book “La sociedad de la nieve” by Pablo Vierci; rated R for brief graphic nudity, violent/disturbing material; in limited theaters Dec. 22, 2023, streaming on Netflix on Jan. 4, 2024). But filmmaker Bayona and his co-writers tell it in such a way that it demands to be experienced again. And it’s likely to feel fresh to anyone who has read any of the 26 books or seen any of the nine documentaries and (now) four feature films about the 1972 Andes flight disaster (aka Miracle of the Andes). Bayona’s film is a technical marvel, full of harrowing, difficult-but-rewarding scenes set in the most threatening situations that nature has to offer. But the filmmaking never gets in the way of the storytelling, which needs no embellishment to be as fascinating and life-affirming as the first time it was told.

Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571 was a chartered flight that departed Montevideo, Uruguay, for Santiago, Chile, on Oct. 12, 1972, with 45 passengers and crew, including 19 members of the Old Christians Club rugby team, on board. A storm in the Andes mountains forced an unplanned overnight stay in Mendoza, Argentina. The next day, as the flight was going through the snowy Andes, an inexperienced co-pilot misjudged the plane’s location, and it struck a mountain ridge. Both wings and the tail cone were sheared off, and the fuselage, with most of the passengers inside, slid an estimated 2,400 feet down a glacier. Three crew members and nine passengers died immediately; others died soon after from their injuries and exposure. For the rest, the nightmare was just beginning. Search-and-rescue teams couldn’t see the crashed plane amongst the snow, and the effort was called off after eight days. Thirteen more passengers died from exposure, starvation and frequent avalanches. Those still alive, facing starvation, resorted to cannibalism, eating the flesh of those who had passed away. Weeks later, when the spring weather improved conditions slightly, two passengers, Nando Parrado (played by Augustin Pardella) and Roberto Canessa (Matías Recalt), remarkably, hiked (without any mountaineering gear) about 38 miles in 10 days, reaching Chile and finding help. The 16 remaining survivors were rescued Dec. 23, 1972, 72 days after their flight had departed Uruguay.

Above all else, “Society of the Snow” is a testament to humans’ will to survive. As one of the crash survivors notes in narration, the snow-covered Andes do not accommodate life, and the harder you try to escape them, the more the mountains fight back. Bayona, cinematographer Pedro Luque and the film’s technical team put the audience right with the passengers and, though it’s impossible to duplicate, help viewers have a sense of what the survivors must have felt. The crash is frightening, but what comes after is even more so, especially when walls of snow start shifting around. “Society of the Snow” also is a reminder of what is possible when those in a challenging, even life-threatening situation, cooperate. It would have been easy for the surviving passengers to have turned against each other. Instead, they teamed up to share what little food they had and build makeshift shelter from the conditions. They even trained for the hike into the mountains though it was considered a suicide mission. Bayona uses graphics to note the names and ages of those who died; most onboard were in their 20s and had so much life ahead of them. The performances are stellar from a cast of mostly newcomers. The story of the crash and rescue of the survivors is one for the ages. This film does that story justice. And then some.

My score: 92 out of 100

I (again) watched a lot of movies in 2023. I did not get around to seeing everything new; looking back, my viewing was dominated by horror movies; and I watched more older movies in 2023 than in previous years. Here is my list of top 10 movies that were released in ’23, with director’s name, genre and my original score out of 100:

1 (tie) “Godzilla Minus One” (Takashi Yamazaki, action/sci-fi, 98)

1 (tie) “Poor Things” (Yorgos Lanthimos, fantasy/sci-fi/black comedy, 97)

3. “Past Lives” (Celine Song, drama, 97)

4. “May December” (Todd Haynes, drama/dark comedy, 95)

5. “Oppenheimer” (Christopher Nolan, historical drama, 97)

6. “The Holdovers” (Alexander Payne, drama/comedy, 95)

7. “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” (Joaquim Dos Santos/Justin K. Thompson/Kemp Powers, animated superhero action, 95)

8. “The Night of the 12th” (Dominik Moll, crime drama, 93)

9. “Sanctuary” (Zachary Wigon, thriller/mystery/drama/dark comedy, 90)

10. “Killers of the Flower Moon” (Martin Scorsese, historical Western crime drama, 89)

High honorable mention (with original score): “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part I” (92); “State of Grace” (91); “Air” (87); John Wick: Chapter 4” (87); “Anatomy of a Fall” (86); “Barbie” (84); “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” (83)

Honorable mention: “Wonka,” “Thanksgiving,” “Napoleon,” “The Killer,” “Loren & Rose,” “Cobweb,” “Theater Camp,” “Showing Up,” “Evil Dead Rise”

***

I see a lot of movies with my buddy Mark. Here’s his top 10 for 2023:

1. “Past Lives”
2. “John Wick: Chapter 4”
3. “Society of the Snow”
4. “Godzilla Minus One”
5. “The Holdovers”
6. “Air”
7. “Poor Things”
8. “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part I”
9. “The Killer”
10. “Napoleon”