Tuner: This is a 2025 film starring Leo Woodall, Dustin Hoffman and Havana Rose Liu. It is directed by Daniel Roher. The story answers the ongoing question about what could possibly go wrong when a basically good natured young person gets involved with the wrong people for the right reason. Leo Woodall plays Nick, a young man in the piano tuning business with his much older boss, Harry played by Dustin Hoffman. We learn that Nick is very skilled in what he does, and he benefits from a hearing condition called hyperacusis, which means he is hyper-sensitive to everyday, ordinary sounds. It can be very painful for him, and he wears increasing levels of ear phones to ward off the loud sounds. One day through a series of innocent events involving Harry, Nick discovers a new skill.

Predictably, Nick comes to realize an American affliction has impacted Harry and his wife with their inability to pay unexpected medical bills. They are in debt, and Harry’s piano tuning business doesn’t bring in a lot of money. Nick needs to find some extra money to help out, being a good supporter of Harry. Quite by accident Nick stumbles upon a guy who runs a security business, named Uri, but it seems to be a rather precarious proposition. Uri is intrigued by Nick’s skills and gets a first hand demonstration. With success, Uri hires Nick to assist in other operations which will pay Nick handsomely, yet seemingly less than deserved, for his contributions. Meanwhile as this carries on, Nick pays down Harry’s debt, and he meets a young woman looking to finish her music composition. Nick tunes her piano, and they meet up some more. Things continue on, and escalate to a head that was unexpected for me. Of course the question becomes how does Nick, this nice oung man extricate himself from this difficult situation, all the while trying to keep his second life hidden and away from view for those he cares about. It all comes crashing down for him.

Woodall is very good in this role and he is convincing. Nick was a talented pianist himself, but he was struck by this condition and it forever changed the direction of his life. Through no fault of his own fate decide to have its way with this young man. Hoffman as the elderly Harry is convincing although he doesn’t have much of a stretch in the role. Havana plays Ruthie the aspiring composer and her relationship with Nick. It was all satisfying for me and I enjoyed this. I felt sympathy for young Nick who gets caught up into something that he can’t control. It takes over and risks everything for him and the world that he has pieced back together. This is worth checking out if you can.

Hamnet Revisit – Book Comparison: I maintain that Hamnet was a Best Picture from last year. Jessie Buckley’s performance which won her a Best Actress award was inspiring, and showed such depth that it was a landslide winner of all notable awards. I wanted to read the book written by Maggie O’Farrell and compare. For me this was an interesting exercise as many would maintain rather glibly that “a book is always better than the movie”. In this particular instance I think that this is partially true, in that there is greater charater development, certainly in Stratford Upon Avon with the relationships between Agnes and The Latin Tutor, and family members. The book is a lot more detail in those relationships (the homelife of the husband, as well as Agnes’ own) along with their relationship together from first meeting to courtship and marriage. This is very informative to show the changes that they go through as life provides its challenges. But there are things that the movie adds which provide more richness in the story as discussed below.

The book takes a different structure than the film by having parallel stories of the past with the present time with the husband and wife and their three children. Midway through there is the turning point event which forever changes everyone in the family, which comes later in the movie. The movie adds some scenes to provide more background with Hamnet himself which set up later aspects of the movie in the last Act very well. It is welcome. Then the second half of the book focuses on the distance between Agnes and her husband, showing her understandable distress at what has transpired. How unfair that it all is, and showing a very real aspect of life in the 1580s with disease (the plague that took thousands of lies), and the risk to the women in delivering children. One notes that there is no electricity, no refrigeration, no toothpaste, or other hygiene products to speak of beyond soap. No running water or sanitation to speak of. Medical knowledge was scant, with few people having any knowledge of herbology and natural cures. People were hearty or they didn’t survive. The book spends a chapter outlining how a plague can be started with a simple act in faraway Italy with insects. I will say that the the film through Agnes’ reaction better shows the immediacy and impact of her devastation in the life changing event.

Those involved with the movie did an excellent job for the last Act, which went beyond what the book described. The book focuses more time in the travel in getting Agnes from Stratford to London than the performance itself where she watches with great skepticism and anger about any play to capture the essence of her son. In the movie, with the incredible music from Max Richter On the Nature of Daylight used to devastating effect also in Arrival , you can see in Agnes’ face and her actions without words her realization about how her husband is able to communicate through his art his experience with all of this. It is beautifully done, and brings together everything that we have seen earlier about this couple and their small family. We see her husband note her unexpectedly in the crowd from backstage, still dressed as the character of Hamlet’s father. And as sees this perfomance so much is captured: Sadness. Grief. Empathy. Pain. Sorow. Understanding. Forgiveness. Relief. Unconditional love. Ultimately Joy. The movie as a companion piece brings out more in the book, and the book provides more background and depth to the movie. They really go hand in hand so well. I will say that a minor character in the movie, Agnes’ brother Bartholemew shines on through time and again in the book. The children Susanna and Judith shine as well, along with the Agnes’ step-mother Joan who shows her colours time and again. I do like the fact that the book never names Agnes’ husband; he is The Latin Tutor, the husband, the son who never quite measured up for his father. Yet we all know who he is, and for those who think that Shakespeare in Love captured what you knew about his homelife, this is a very marked departure from that. I would recommend reading the book wholeheartedly.

TIFF: The Toronto Film Festival which brings a buzz to this city each September began on Thursday. I was able to attend an in-person discussion with Gary Oldman. I jumped at the opportunity to hear Oldman speak because I regard him as one of the most versatile living actors with an amazing body of work. He can be a hero, and he can be a villain with equal conviction. He won an Oscar for his portrayal of Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour, which you would be hard pressed to have imagined when I first saw him in 1986 as Sex Pistol Sid Vicious in the movie Sid & Nancy. He also was knighted, which ceremony took place at Windsor Castle which was quite an honour for him.

His chat was almost an hour, in an almost full theatre. He was asked questions by a moderator. Some of the highlights for me in listening to someone who has been in the business about four decades are as follows. He very much enjoyed Train Dreams last year and felt it was one of the best films, deserving of more accolades. He is 29 years sober, after the early part of his career embracing that “bad boy” image that he created while playing Sid Vicious. He had mentioned that for the movie The Fifth Element, which he did not like his work, that the voice he created was a combination of Bugs Bunny and politician Ross Perot! He also was not a fan of his work in Harry Potter as Sirius Black, but he talked about Scabbers the rat, which was real and not CGI, and how the rat seemed to need a break every 15 minutes! He loves the character of Jackson Lamb who kind of conjured up with his creative partner in wanting to get back into a TV series. His first Emmy nomination came from doing Friends. He marveled at the work schedule for them, and wanted to be able to do more TV. And finally he closed by directly addressing the rumour about the next James Bond. There was a news item that he knew who it was. He confirmed that this was nonsense. All he said to address the rumour directly was that he answered a question from a reporter about James Bond and he said that he had heard there had a short list of actors to portray the famous spy. He knew that Jack Lowden, from Slow Horses, was under consideration in this short list and he said “I am crossing my fingers for Jack!!” That was it! All in all, it was a very interesting evening