VIFF 2025 | Capsule Reviews: "The Mastermind", "A Welcome Distraction", "Blue Moon" & "Is This Thing On?"
THE MASTERMIND
Reichardt has referred to her works as “-glimpses of people passing through” (The Guardian, 2014). In her latest, The Mastermind, she teases towards a departure from this format—something more dynamic and, thanks to the jaunty score, jazz-inflected—but by the back portion of the film, this O’Connor-starring “art heist” film becomes as shaggy and as sauntering as anything she has produced. It is a crime film in the way Jarmusch’s Down by Law is a crime film, with its plodding, quizzical approach to law evasion and its sad sack of a protagonist, who spends most of the story just kind of… sulking around.
Those inclined towards Reichardt’s stripped-down, single-egg-and-two-strips-of-stale-bacon approach will find something to chew on here, but for the uninitiated and less-inclined, The Mastermind is serviceable but insubstantial and slight. The supporting characters are wasted, and while O’Connor does his best to carry with his roguish charm, his “JB” reads as too scummy to root for.
A WELCOME DISTRACTION
As a Vancouverite, I would be remiss if I didn’t touch on this indie production both shot and set in my home city, but as a discerning critic, I must also offer a disclaimer: this is a glaringly underbaked film. Brian Daniel Johnson’s first feature falls victim of that indie movie syndrome where every shot must be a medium shot or a close-up of its actors—lots of tight, claustrophobic framing and blurred-out backgrounds. This might have worked if the story was a strict character study about navigating grief, but it also touches on a community/cult (the “welcome distraction” at hand) that emphasizes connection to environment, and environment is… kind of absent here! Vancouver is absent here. Local audiences may be able to relate to the specific brand of loneliness that can set in when one’s surroundings are so picturesque, but good luck to everyone else given only one brief shot of the North Shore mountains.
And as for the story: think Paul Thomas Anderson's The Master if it had a $5k budget, and if Freddie Quell got into hikes and healing crystals. There are some interesting characters in the mix—the insistent drug dealer/friend being a highlight, as well as the seldom-seen but scene-stealing cult leader—but much else feels aimless and only tentatively sketched out. There are glimmers of a really good film—no doubt—but this is very clearly a first feature; a lot could be tightened up, and a lot could be expanded upon. Thankfully, the score does a very commendable job of adding gravitas.
BLUE MOON
Linklater’s living the dream: using his films to recreate and hang out in the watershed moments of art history that inspire him. This year alone, he’s been able to hang out in the 1959 inception of the French New Wave (Nouvelle Vague), and in the 1943 premier night for “Oklahoma!” The latter, Blue Moon, is a cozy little chamber talky set in a New York Theater District bar that has a diminutive Ethan Hawke as Lorenz Hart—the other partner of Richard Rogers (Andrew Scott)—waddling around, chomping cigars, and essentially monologuing for 100 minutes.
As such, the writing is the real highlight of this Linklater outing—it’s witty, nonchalant, humorous, poetic, and sad, often all in the same breath. Hawke is given plenty to dig into, and he does so with gusto, fully committing to the loquacious and tragicomic Hart. Viewers with an affinity for musical theatre will find lots to dig into as well, as will the viewers who aren’t tiring of seeing Margaret Qualley in everything (she does a decent enough job in this film, but admittedly feels a little out of place).
Outside of the script and the performances, though, this is another Linklater effort with a damningly uninspired presentation. The man is too fixed on hanging out to do anything interesting with the camera, with its movements or with its compositions. One could argue that visuals need not be the emphasis in a chamber film of this nature, but film is a visual medium; if one wants to go about their film like they’re directing a stage play, then just direct a stage play!
IS THIS THING ON?
Whereas Cooper’s unhinged wildcard shtick felt glaringly out of place in those choice scenes from Maestro, it finds traction again here, his third directorial effort that also sees him play a character named Balls. But Balls isn’t the focus of this film; Will Arnett gets the spotlight in a rare dramatic lead role that sees him reckoning with his crumbling marriage via standup comedy-turned-therapy.
Is This Thing On? is a refreshingly modest and down-to-earth turn for Cooper that features charming, well fleshed-out characters and maybe his most relatable writing yet. Arnett’s Alex and Laura Dern’s Tess are rather well-off, and their falling-out rather tame, but their frustrations feel genuine, their chemistry feels earned, and their rage against middle age feels both nuanced and endearing. The standup is nothing to write home about, but standup in this story serves a function beyond eliciting laughs, and it also lays grounds for a fascinating look inside the community operations of New York’s famous Comedy Cellar.
It’s far from groundbreaking or provocative, but in a landscape littered with cynical and bitter tales of marital distress, this picture might just stand out with its warmth and its crowd pleasing aspects. If nothing else, it’s one to recommend to your parents. Because they can definitely relate to being in their fifties and having full-time jobs and having two children with all the time and resources and cigarettes in the world to pursue their unrealized dreams!