MOVIE REVIEW: BOILING POINT (2021)

 

Directed by Philip Barantini 

Written by Philip Barantini and James Cummings

Cinematography by Matthew Lewis

Edited by Alex Fountain

Music by Aaron May and David Ridley 

Production Design by Aimee Meek

Art Direction by Deb Milner

Set Decoration by Bill Milner 

Costumes by Karen Smyth 

Produced by Hester Ruoff and Bart Ruspoli

Starring

Thomas Coombes as Health Inspector 

Stephen Graham as The Chef, Andy

Vinette Robinson as Lieutenant Chef Carly

Ray Panthaki as Lieutenant Chef Freeman

Alice Feetham as Front of House Manager Beth

Jason Flemying as Washed-Up Celebrity Chef Stakeholder Guy

Lourdes Faberes as Food Critic 

Izuka Hoyle as Camille

Malachi Kirby as Tony

Hannah Walters as Emily

Stephen McMillan as Jamie

Aine Rose Daly as Robyn

Lauryn Arjufo as Andrea

Gary Lamont as Dean 

. . .

". . . I don't really want to be here . . . I don't really know what I'm doing . . . and nobody likes me here . . ."

. . .

Review by William D. Tucker. 

Third movie with the title Boiling Point. 

Is it the charm?

Well . . .

This Boiling Point is about how work stress fucks with you.

It's about how human beings make the best decisions they possibly, realistically can within hypercompetitive capitalism, how they can have hustle for miles and days and years . . . and still end up fucking miserable. 

This one is about the delusion of 'leaving it at the door' when you come to work, which is another way of saying, "This one is about how grief, shame, untreated-or undiagnosed, or even unarticulated-mental illness, class inequality, white supremacist racism-both subtle and overt, sexism-both subtle and overt, and lack of access to health-care-mental/physical fucks with you."

This is a film that expresses intense skepticism about the whole 'work/life' balance thing. Where does work end, exactly? How do we measure the 'weight' of work versus the 'weight' of life? What if you are someone suffering from intense grief in your 'life' which you have no way of magically switching off when you show up for 'work?' What about when your work stress invades your non-work life? Isn't this distinction between 'work' and 'life' a notional evasion similar to the romantic idea of 'Natural' versus 'Unnatural?'

These notions are explored convincingly, if pessimistically, in Boiling Point, a movie that isn't afraid to say, "Yes. We have many conflicts. Pretending otherwise gets us nowhere."

It's all set inside a trendy London restaurant on a busy Friday night. Workers are out sick. The operation is shortstaffed. The Chef is late. There’s a state health inspector knocking 'em down from five to three stars right before they're supposed to open. The inspector seems to take a harsher tone with workers of color than he does with the white employees. Yes, the inspector has legitimate reasons for writing up health violations, but there's a tone and attitude which could be improved-why not lay out the issues more dispassionately, with more respect for all working people? 

Eventually, the restaurant opens, and the camera takes us from the kitchen to the dining area to the bins out back and on into the freezer-it isn't that it's a large space. It's compact. It's tense. Tempers flare. Supplies are inadequate. People are showing up late or not at all. And the customers keep on coming.

You've got social media influencers hustling for freebies-"we'll boost your visibility online!"

You've got a table full of obnoxious Americans who end up groping their server even after he tells them he's happily married to his husband. 

One sequence is telling: a young blonde white woman server takes an order from a middle-aged white man who clearly relishes playing king of his family. And, oh, how he takes to this server. But then a young Black woman takes over as regular server for this table and the man treats her with nastiness and contempt. It's possible that it isn't racism . . . but it sure looks like it. Sure feels like it.

You've got a hoity-toity food critic showing up-wasn't that a plot point in Dinner Rush-and she just happens to be dating a man who is also the main financial stakeholder in the restaurant-a washed-up former celebrity chef type. This stakeholder is also the former boss of the Chef-bit of an Obi-Wan/Vader situation. 

You also have communications breaking down under stress and overload of throughput. Speed kills, to put it simply. 

The Chef has his two Lieutenant Chefs who work nonstop even whilst he ducks out to re-up whatever his adult beverage of choice happens to be in his health inspector approved water bottle. This is a source of resentment since the two Lieutenant Chefs seldom have time to relax, nor do they receive the same level of respect as The Chef even if he’s the one fucking off at inopportune moments. Fuses lit all around . . .

You've got conflict between the Kitchen Staff and the Front of House Manager. Front of House is perceived as not wanting to get its hands dirty, while Kitchen gets chewed out for being too slow. 

You've got a dishwasher who's trying to stay on top of her job while pregnant and underpaid.

You've got about a third of the staff who work there while dreaming of making it as actors, nightclub DJs, musicians, etc. "This isn't my real job-I'm actually XYZ!" type of deal. This creates a more subtle form of friction between these Daydream Believers and the Lifers: Chef, Lieutenant Chefs, Front of House Manager . . .

Blow-ups ensue. 

Ugly truths are expressed. 

But the momentum of the business seems to steamroll any hope of change.

Money must be made.

Boiling Point is another one of those movies that presents itself as being done in a single unbroken take . . . and it's convincingly done. But, you know, if it turned out there were some cleverly concealed edits it wouldn't diminish the movie in my eyes. I forgot it was all being done in one go after about ten minutes.  I was totally absorbed into the story. Where's it going? How's it going to play out?

My criticisms are minor. 

Firstly, the Chef functions as a protagonist, but this is really more of an ensemble piece. This movie works best in the tangle of its chaotic middle, wherein we cannot escape from the interconnecting dilemmas playing out in the Kitchen and Front of House arenas. When we return to the Chef as a designated protagonist figure-I dunno. It loses something. It's not badly done. I just personally resisted the process of 'collapsing into the protagonist' from the more collective outlook.

Secondly, I found myself resisting the final scene. Not badly done at all, but . . . I dunno. It's not making any compromises, that's for sure, but it's seeming finality was just a touch moralistic for what is otherwise a realistic and sociological piece.

Thirdly, the Obi-Wan/Vader stuff-the conflict between the Chef and the stakeholder guy . . . once again, not badly done at all, but I didn't care about it as much as I cared about the Front of House and Kitchen arenas. 

But Boiling Point worked for me, overall. I've watched it twice, now, and I'll probably watch it a few more times. Its drive and grittiness are absorbing, nor does it pretend that everything is going to magically be all right. I appreciate those qualities very much above all else.

So . . . I watched three different movies titled Boiling Point, and they were all pretty great. That's the world I live in, and it definitely isn't boring. 

MOVIE REVIEW: BOILING POINT (1993)

 

Written and Directed by James B. Harris

Adapted from the novel Money Men by Gerald Petievich 

Starring

Wesley Snipes as Jimmy 

Dennis Hopper as Red

Dan Hedaya as Brady

Viggo Mortensen as Ronnie 

Lolita Davidovich as Vikki

Valerie Perrine as Mona

Jonathan Banks as Max

Paul Gleason as Transaction Man

Seymour Cassel as Leach

Tobin Bell as Roth

Tony Lo Bianco as Dio

. . .

"You just look for the happiest redhead in the whole world!"

. . .

Review by William D. Tucker. 

Boiling Point . . . another movie with the title Boiling Point . . .

This one is about Jimmy, a U.S. Treasury Agent who is trying to figure out who killed his partner during an undercover sting operation over some counterfeit bills. The details of the investigation are engaging moment to moment, but I think the motivations of the characters will probably be what sticks with you when it's all said and done. 

Jimmy's under threat of reassignment due to the fact that someone died under his watch. Jimmy's work has ruined his relationship with his wife and child. All this has got him questioning his commitment to his job. Jimmy tries to be an at-a-distance father to his child. His ex-wife has already moved on to another man, and this is a reality Jimmy can't quite accept. The night that his partner is killed, Jimmy hits up his ex for a comfort bang-well, things could be complicated even back before social media, y'know?

Jimmy's partner was killed by a criminal named Ronnie, a callous young man under the influence of a con artist named Red. Red owes a gangster named Dio lots of money, and so Red is under some pressure to elevate his hustle before he gets zapped. Ronnie killed the undercover agent more or less on Red's behalf, although Red himself is averse to violence. That's what's amusing about Red: he's such a nice guy in person. He's clearly a bullshitter and out of step with the world with his off-the-rack suits and fancy wingtips, but you would be charmed by him for a few minutes at a time. You would have to be a brain-damaged psychopath like Ronnie to bet your entire future on Red, tho'. 

Red hits up a crooked lawyer named Max, who's known for circulating funny money, but Max knows Red's underwater, and tells him to fuck off-which is why Red has the younger guy Ronnie on the leash. Ronnie hits up Max for a similar deal on Red's behalf with Max being none the wiser.

That's Red's con. He has Ronnie as a kind of spare self to do things with, and it's intriguing to watch how this all operates. If Ronnie were less inclined to shoot people to death with his sawed-off shotgun it would almost be cute. 

Jimmy, meanwhile, is able to talk his way out of reassignment, and puts pressure on a couple of other underworld operators to see what shakes out, but his desire is for vengeance, not justice. Jimmy's head is in a bad place. The job has ruined his family and gotten his guy killed, and for what? Jimmy's no longer interested in putting his quarry in a cage. It’s body bag time!

What keeps all this interesting is that Jimmy doesn't know what Red and Ronnie look like, and Red and Ronnie don't know that Jimmy is even after 'em. Red and Ronnie don't even know that they killed an undercover Treasury Agent! They think they just waxed a fellow criminal in a motel room. The film has some fun with Jimmy and Red obliviously patronizing the same late night food counter, pissing in the men's room urinal at the same time, and even hiring the same call girl-tho' that last one is for separate dates. Presumably, a threesome would be out-of-bounds for a middle-aged crook who likes 1940s swing music and an uptight federal agent. 

Like many crime movies, the main idea here has to do with the conflict between appearances and reality. Red is a hoot to bullshit with, but he’s a delusional liar with blood on his hands. Ronnie is young and handsome, but also stupid and murderous. Max is an outwardly prosperous lawyer whose wealth comes primarily from dirty deeds done not so cheap. And our hero Jimmy isn't so much interested in serving justice as he is fixated on lethal payback. 

This is all fascinating to watch. It ends about how you expect it will end. At least it did for me. This is not an action movie, tho' there are a few sequences of mayhem. This is more in the tradition of hard-boiled crime fiction mixed with a police procedural. We have the line between law and crime, cops and crooks, but as for what's right and wrong . . . that's trickier. Our sympathies are no doubt with Jimmy, but he definitely makes some questionable choices. 

The dialogue is sharp. Red's effusive, self-aggrandizing speeches are the highlights. 

I also liked the interrogations Jimmy conducts with the criminal operators he has to handle. These end up being negotiations over who and what and where and how much time spent incarcerated and how much time free-I found it more or less convincing. 

The cast is solid. Look for future horror villain Jigsaw in a memorable supporting bit. Hopper was born to play a grifter like Red. Snipes is convincingly disillusioned yet determined as Jimmy. Viggo Mortensen is creepy as Ronnie. Dan Hedaya plays Brady-Jimmy's partner-and gets to run from an explosion in one scene. Lolita Davidovich plays the nicest person here-the call girl, Vikki, who is also the least dishonest in her way. Breaking Bad's Jonathan Banks gets to play Max, the lawyer, in good times and bad. And I always appreciate Seymour Cassel. Cassel plays a crook named Leach, and I like to imagine he told stories about working with John Cassavetes between takes.

Boiling Point . . . it's another movie with the title Boiling Point. 

I had a good time with it.

MOVIE REVIEW: BOILING POINT (1990)

Written and directed by Takeshi Kitano 

Produced by Kazuyoshi Okuyama

Cinematography by Katsumi  Yanagishima 

Edited by Toshio Taniguchi 

Starring 

Yurei Yanagi as Masaki

Beat Takeshi as Uehara

. . .

"You should've swung your bat at least once. "

. . .

Review by William D. Tucker. 

Boiling Point is about a man who struggles to live up to the expectations of being a vengeful protagonist in a violent, harrowing crime movie. 

But we start things off in Act One real casual, kinda goofy, kinda like The Sandlot but with adults . . .

Masaki is a minor league baseball player who struggles to hit the ball. He doesn't really want to be at practice. He hides in the baseball field's restroom pretending to take lengthy shits in order to avoid the scorn of his teammates. Maybe he's constipated. Stress can do that to you. After getting struck out for the umpteenth time, Masaki goes off to sit by his lonesome in some tall grass. 

We find out that Masaki works at a gas station. Pumping gas. Wiping down windshields. Vacuuming interiors. Dumping ashtrays. Washing mud off tires. He has no zeal for this job, and can barely be bothered to show up on time.

Is Masaki depressed? Is he dissatisfied with his rut in life? He seems to feel trapped. 

One day, a gangster rolls into the gas station expecting full service only to be left waiting for an unreasonable amount of time by Masaki, who is supposed to be on duty as an attendant. The gangster lashes out with verbal abuse and violence. Masaki punches the gangster. This is the fatal mistake. The gangster has a whole gang of goons ready to lean on the gas station. Which they do. The rest of this film follows Masaki in his winding, often half-assed, quest for vengeance. 

Now, Masaki has the right idea. That yakuza guy was an asshole, and yakuza, generally, are crooks and exploiters, so there's no reason not to fight back . . .

. . . except for the stark reality that everyone else at the gas station is afraid to stand up to the gangsters, and prefer the safety of apology, appeasement, and self-abasement.

Also, Masaki isn't really a tough guy. Although he exists within a film with genre elements-gangster intrigues, vigilante justice, three act structure-Masaki is closer to being a person from real life than a genre protagonist. He's justifiably outraged, but he’s not someone with a capacity for violence. Masaki has no military training, nor is he inherently attracted to bloodshed. The guy is barely able to maintain normal conversations-perhaps due to shyness or social anxiety-let alone crack one-liners as he slaughters bad guys. In movie protagonist terms, Masaki is a loser. In real life terms, Masaki is just trying to get by like billions of other people on the planet. 

This is Masaki's dilemma: can he-a Real Life Person-survive ordeals that usually call for a Violent Movie Protagonist? 

Well . . .

Masaki and one of his baseball bros decide to leave the sticks for the big city of Okinawa. The plan is to purchase illegal firearms so they can go shoot up the bogus real estate offices where the yakuza bullies hold court. Masaki and his friend don't divulge specifics to We the Audience of how they hope to buy guns which are severely restricted by law in Japan. It seems like a bit of a fishing expedition. Big cities are places of crime and guns. Want a gun? Go to the big city! I also wasn't clear if we're just supposed to be aware that it's common knowledge that you can purchase firearms from American military personnel stationed in Okinawa. This was a surprise to me, in any case.

But before Masaki and his bro can buy the illegal guns, they need a hookup. This hookup is a gangster named Uehara. Uehara is in big trouble with his boss for spending money recklessly, and drinking to excess. Uehara is also a walking timebomb who revels in torture, rape, and murder, but the boss is just like, "The money, Lebowski!"

Uehara hijacks the Second Act. Masaki and his bro go out 'partying' with Uehara and his sworn bro . . . and it's a wonder any of them survive. Complete tonal shift. The slackery vibe of Act One is gone, and we are on a nonstop death trip with the frightful demon beast that is Uehara. The situations of Act One induced a certain anxiety. Uehara's pitiless, stony gaze may induce panic in some viewers who stay through Act Two. 

Now, Uehara's problem is that he's too good at being a Violent Movie Protagonist. Uehara makes Charles Bronson look like Mr. Belvedere. Uehara makes Frank Booth-the Dennis Hopper villain from Blue Velvet-look like Tickle Me Elmo. Uehara makes Chuck Norris look like a Teletubby. Hell, Uehara makes John Wick look like Keanu Reeves. 

Uehara has no problem making the necessary moves to buy military grade hardware from an American soldier. Uehara has no hesitation when it comes to obliterating his own boss and those who stand with the boss. Uehara cares not for any innocent people who get caught in the crossfire. Hey, disregard for civilian deaths is kinda baked-in to any form of warfare including gang warfare. But Uehara also seems to relish his own destruction which is where the guy kinda seals his doom. In a completely amoral universe, you can live a life of total depravity, but if your appetite for destruction consumes even your own life . . . 

. . . well . . .

. . . guess that means Masaki's carrying the baton for Act Three. 

I suppose it's a spoiler to say that Masaki survives as long as he does. Although after his ordeal with Uehara, he might wish he had been killed with the others massacred in Okinawa. 

Don't get me wrong. My heart is with Masaki on this one. But this is a guy who's barely equipped to hold down his gas station job let alone confront the heart of madness that drives Boiling Point to its jaw-dropping climax. Yes, there is a helluva payoff to this elliptical, confounding, and punitive film experience. The pettiness, stupidity, and sadism that suffuse the asinine conflicts demand some spectacle of mayhem, I suppose. We begin in a world without any moral order, and Masaki, in his blundering, imposes . . . something . . . upon this mess-

-unless he doesn't. 

The end returns us to the baseball field's restroom, wherein Masaki lingers over his phantom bowel movement. Was it all a B-Movie phantasia in the mind of an anxiety-ridden minor leaguer? Did Masaki carry over his Save Data into New Game+? Does Masaki-at long last-get to drop a fat shit? 

Maybe we need a cartoon owl to start licking on some lollipops to find out for sure.

Boiling Point fucks with you like that.