Christmas Day is always a big release day for movies. There’s always a prognosticated awards contender that shows up around this time, and theaters bank on the holiday traffic of family outings and traditions, and this year is no different. The theaters are poised to be stacked with a wide array of new releases, with everything from a sports biopic to a music biopic to the failed attempt at “Barbenhiemer” title mashing “Babyratu.” With so much happening on a single day, we’ve got you covered with what to prioritize and what’s good, bad and/or indifferent. Since we’ve already reviewed “Nosferatu,” let’s take a look at three other major releases hitting theaters Christmas Day.
“A Complete Unknown”
I’m not in on music biopics as a genre. I find them repetitive and indistinguishable from each other, none of them ever trying to break the mold or change themselves for the better. If you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all, and all exist in the world of “Walk Hard: A Dewey Cox Story” that parodies the genre so hard and so well it sets the standard for all music biopics. “A Complete Unknown” does its best to steer clear of the typical trappings of its genre, but ultimately fails to be much of anything at all. I’m not a Bob Dylan fan by any means, so his life and impact on art and music are lost on me entirely. James Mangold attempts to capture the alluring yet mysterious nature of the reclusive artist, but in turn tells us nothing about him at all or the impact of his music. As he tries to buck convention, all we’re left with is a greatest hits album only for Dylan heads, inaccessible to those on the outside. In all the mystery of Dylan, all I learned in “A Complete Unknown” is that young Bob Dylan was a loser folk fuckboy who can play the guitar well. I went to college and met this guy a thousand times, thanks.
I know that’s not the intention, and Mangold does his best to direct the hell out of a rather barebones movies. But “A Complete Unknown” is a smarter, more measured, less insulting “Bohemian Rhapsody,” and I don’t necessarily mean that as a compliment. Sure, it’s not as egregiously stupid as that film, but it’s also not informative in any way. In its attempt to give us the antithesis to “Elvis,” it delivers a meandering, often meaningless look at a small part of a larger life with little impact. Timothée Chalamet is transcendent, delivering a dazzling nuanced performance that completely embodies the real life Dylan. He disappears entirely, the sweat equity of learning every aspect of playing and singing paying off big to be the best part of an average at best film. For what it’s worth, everyone in “A Complete Unknown” is phenomenal, from Edward Norton as Pete Seeger, Monica Babaro as Joan Baez, and Boyd Hollbrook as the best Johnny Cash to date. I said what I said. I’m sure fans of Bob Dlyan will dig the music and advocate for its merits, but on the outside looking in I found “A Complete Unknown” a slog to get through.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5 Stars
“Babygirl“
Give me Nicole Kidman and Harris Dickinson in a spicy “erotic” drama and I am all in. That was hook enough for me to check out the premiere of “Babygirl” at TIFF, the end result being more of a mixed bag. A measured and bold look at sex, desire and power dynamics, “Babygirl “narrowly escapes its erotic sleaze by having a lot more to say about its topics and delivering layered complex characters as they explore themselves – literally. Despite Kidman and Dickinson giving all of themselves in mind, body and performance, the film falls just shy of being as interesting as it could be, shying away from nothing except rushing its conclusions with a blend of speed and ambiguity that doesn’t go far enough into its themes. For all its talk of being salacious, it’s rather tame in that department, more concerned with what its characters do outside of their sexual rendevous and secret hotel meetings than what is actually drawing them to each other, rarely exploring the ideas of subs and doms and kinks.
And for as much as both leads give, they don’t necessarily show anything in “Babygirl” they haven’t show before in other films. Kidman has dominated the talks for her performance, but it’s actually Dickinson and Antonio Banderas as her loving but unsatisfactory husband that do a bit more. Dickinson is a dom unsure of himself, not fully developed as a youth trying to fill a void that he is more than capable of doing but isn’t nearly as assured or put together as often portrayed. He does a lot of subtle work here, and is probably a bit more compelling than Kidman’s CEO character. Banderas is often sidelined, but explodes with overwhelming emotion when he’s thrust into the indecencies of his wife. It’s powerful stuff, something people who talk about “Babygirl” don’t talk about enough. It’s a surprising continuation of “Eyes Wide Shut” as if it could be the legacy sequel that follows the wife exploring her own sexual awakening after a bitter divorce. That may be a little too close to home, but “Babygirl” certainly shares the same bones and is definitely cut from the same cloth. I just wish it went as far as its connective tissue.
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
“The Fire Inside“
On paper, “The Fire Inside” should be another standard sports biopic. Though it has plenty of the typical beats you would expect from an underdog story, the film smartly chooses to go beyond the tropes and shed some light on different aspects of the real life story. Namely, Clarissa Shields winning at the Olympics is where most sports stories would stop, ending on a triumphant high note. “The Fire Inside” puts this success right smack in the middle, and focuses on the struggles of female athletes in a male dominated sport fighting to be taken seriously. Winning big isn’t always the life changing victory we imagine it to be, and “The Fire Inside” asks us to look beyond the confines of the genre and examine the real impact Shields has had on women’s boxing outside of the ring. It is what makes the film fascinating and better than expected. Cinematographer turned director Rachel Morrison flexes her skills behind the camera, not just shooting but knowing what to shoot, when to shoot it, and why it should be shot.
It’s a great turn for her, and “The Fire Inside” feels vibrant and grounded operating both within and outside the sports biopic genre. It helps that Ryan Destiny is excellent as young Shields, giving a breakthrough performance as the titular character. She’s easy to root for and easy to get behind, and Morrison frames the in ring action to thrilling effect that makes Destiny feel believable as a young boxer. Of course, it’s Brian Tyree Henry who once again reminds us that he is one of the best actors working today and is somehow incapable of giving a bad performance. He simply does not miss, and “The Fire Inside” is better because of him. The two have excellent chemistry, and often make up for some of the film’s development shortcomings. Though not the best of its kind, Morrison is at least attempting to do something different and shows tremendous promise as a director. “The First Inside” is a genuine crowdpleaser, a perfect Christmas Day family watch that will have you cheering and rooting for Shields the whole way.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5 Stars
