Director: Jacques Audiard
Starring: Karla Sofia Gascon, Zoe Saldana & Selena Gomez
Rated: R (language, some violence & sexual material)
Runtime: 2 hours & 12 minutes

 
When you say the word “musical,” so many could instantly pop into your mind. “The Wizard of Oz,” “Singin’ In The Rain,” “Chicago,” “Cabaret” and “Wicked” are just a few of the best musicals ever made. All of these films have show-stopping performances and songs that are so catchy that you will add them to your Spotify playlist. They transcend the film in that we still want to enter this world even if it is just through the songs. I feel that this is why many have not been particularly fond of Netflix’s Oscar-nominated musical crime thriller, “Emilia Perez.”  
 
“Emilia Perez” tells the story of Juan “Manitas” Del Monte (Karla Sofia Gascon), a drug cartel kingpin who wants to secretly undergo gender-affirming surgery. They have longed to be a woman their whole life. They hire Rita Mora Castro (Zoe Saldana), a burned-out lawyer, to help them set everything up, offering her millions of dollars in return for her services. Manitas is married to Jessi Del Monte (Selena Gomez), and has two children. Manitas decides to leave them behind and let them believe they have died. They become known as Senora Emilia Perez. However, as time goes on, the consequences of that decision lead to them trying to reconnect with their family, leading to a story full of melodrama. As a soap opera fan, I was loving every minute of it.  
​
Where this film excels is in the performances from all three of the main actresses, Karla Sofia Gascon, Zoe Saldana and Selena Gomez. All three manage to portray complex and fierce women who are unapologetic about going after what their heart desires. Gascon manages to balance the mixed emotions of the situation to perfection. On one hand, Manitas did want this life as a woman and felt due to societal pressures, they could not authentically do it as himself. They had to completely reinvent themself secretly. Then, it does begin to bother them that their children are not in their life anymore so they find a way to be in their life as Emilia Perez. Gomez really nails her portrayal of a woman who has been dragged around her whole life and finally has the courage to stand up for herself. Finally, Saldana will most likely win the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress this upcoming Sunday for her performance of Rita. It will be a deserved win. Saldana gives the singular show-stopping performance of this film performing the Oscar-nominated song, “El Mal.”  

The fact that “El Mal” is really the only show-stopping performance brings me to my initial point about “Emilia Perez.” While most musicals deliver catchy songs that transcend the film, the songs from “Emilia Perez” are more self-reflective and baring the soul of the characters for the most part. “Emilia Perez” definitely lacks the theatricality you would expect from a Hollywood musical. Most of the songs are very short and do not deliver the impact I feel was intended. In the traditional sense of what a musical is, I don’t feel this film works really well. I do believe this film was trying to be original but it would have had a bigger impact if more thought was put into the songs of this musical.  

It really is sad that the musical aspect of this film does not seem to work well because it is an interesting story full of twists and turns and characters that we grow to love. The performances and the story are the strongest aspect of the film. They keep you invested.

One thing to note is the film has gotten some controversy over the depiction of the transgender storyline in feeling that it is regressive. My response to that would be that while the LGBTQIA+ community has become more accepted throughout society, the circumstances facing Emilia Perez are facing other people today. While critics may feel more stories need to be told about transgender men and women being more accepted in society, that may be true but it does not mean there isn’t a place for a story like “Emilia Perez.”  

“Emilia Perez: The Film” manages to captivate audiences through its powerful performances of its three main actresses and thrilling story.  
 
“Emilia Perez: The Musical” does not manage to deliver catchy, memorable songs that leave lasting impact on the film you just watched. 

Even though I’ve been a huge classic film buff for more than half my life now, I’ve always had a weak spot regarding the silent film era in my classic film-watching history. So, it comes as no surprise that two of the 12 highest-ranked films on the American Film Institute’s list of the 100 greatest American films of all time I haven’t yet seen are silent films – Buster Keaton’s “The General” from 1926 and Charlie Chaplin’s “City Lights” from 1931.

My pick for the shortest month of the year is the shortest film on my “to watch” list this year, Keaton’s “The General,” which ranks No. 18 on the AFI list.  

It’s the first Keaton film I’ve ever seen, despite having an interest in him as a filmmaker, performer, and likely the first great stuntman in cinema history.

“The General,” a 1926 action-comedy co-directed by Keaton and Clyde Bruckman, tells the story of Johnnie Gray (Keaton), a railroad engineer, who when the Civil War breaks out, tries to enlist to fight, but his job as an engineer is too essential to the South for him to be accepted. However, the rest of the folks in his town, including his love Annabelle Lee (Marion Mack) and her family, view him as a coward – thinking he’s lying about not trying to enlist.

When Gray stumbles upon a Union plot to masquerade as Southern soldiers to hijack a train and use it to destroy railroads and telegraph wires, he attempts to stop it on his own – unaware at first that they’ve also kidnapped Annabelle Lee.

“The General” is based on a true story inspired by the Great Locomotive Chase, which occurred on April 12, 1862, in Northern Georgia. Volunteers from the Union Army commandeered a train called The General and took it north to Chattanooga, Tenn., causing as much damage as they could. They were pursued by Confederate forces, first on foot and later on a succession of trains for 87 miles.

While based on a true story, it does bother me that the film – whether meant to or not – is a positive portrayal of the Confederate South – though certainly not in the way D.W. Griffith’s “The Birth of a Nation” was or even “Gone with the Wind” after it. However, the film is also nearly 100 years old and was closer in time to the Civil War than today in which it was viewed. Keaton was from Kansas, and I’m not sure he had any views on the war, which ended 30 years before his birth.

The story certainly made for a seat-of-your-pants action-thriller with Keaton’s stunts, all done himself, serving as literal death-defying moments, where he’s both running atop moving trains and riding on the cowcatcher at the front using wood beams to deflect other wood beams off the track ahead of him. It’s a marvel of that era of film – one I wish still existed in some aspects but is understandable for financial and safety reasons that it doesn’t. Who can afford to send an actual locomotive crashing through a burning bridge these days?

At only one hour and 18 minutes, the action of “The General” should be enough to keep your attention. However, if you find yourself drifting off, at least try to admire Keaton’s physical comedy and inventive stunts, which are still breathtaking nearly 100 years later.