View Full Version : Thief's Monthly Movie Loot - 2023 Edition
https://media.tenor.com/rQfYZ1S4ensAAAAC/wow-again-colin-jost.gif
You betcha!
Delayed as hell, but here is the thread where I will post details and reviews of my personal movie challenge where I gather a monthly "loot" of films based on a different set of criteria, combined with updates from my podcast, The Movie Loot.
This will be the sixth or seventh year I do this type of challenge and this time, I'm throwin' a bit of a spin to it (at least to the podcast angle of it), mostly by choosing less categories but adding a guest each month to talk about the films we watch. Me and that guest will choose 5 categories, and each of us will watch one film per criteria to complete the challenge.
For anybody curious, here are the threads for previous years: 2021 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=63119) and 2022 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=65503). Once again, I'm sticking with 5 films per month, which gives me some space to catch up on other "freebies" without being so strict.
I will also continue to use the thread to post new episodes of my podcast, which you can find on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, and any audio/podcast platform.
Anyway, anybody is welcome to offer recommendations for any category, and anybody is welcome to join in the challenge and watch films with me. Let's loot!
---------------------------------------------------
Links to the loots of past months
January 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2373082#post2373082) • February 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2377986#post2377986) • March 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2382010#post2382010) • April 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2385586#post2385586) • May 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2391371#post2391371) • June 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2398531#post2398531) • July 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2403554#post2403554) • August 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2409851#post2409851) • September 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2415563#post2415563) • October 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2421713#post2421713) • November 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2429068#post2429068) • December 2023 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2431489#post2431489)
Just for kicks, here is a kinda comprehensive list of everything I saw during the year: a total of 200 films; a bit more than the 163 I saw in 2021 (thank you, short films!). Anyway, here it is...
One: One Week
Two: Two Mules for Sister Sara
Three: Three Amigos!
Four: Four
Five: Five Easy Pieces
Six: Six Men Getting Sick
Seven: Seven (also a rewatch)
Eight: 8 Mile
Nine: The 9th Guest
Ten: Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Eleven: Ocean's Eleven (1960)
Twelve: Twelve Hours to Kill
A or B: Ben-Hur (1907), The Block Island Sound
C or D: Cure
E or F: Encanto
G or H: Gonjiam: Haunted Asylum
I or J: Inside Llewyn Davis
K or L: Kung Fury
M or N: Nu
O or P: Prey, Parenthood
Q or R: Rejected
S or T: Satan's Slaves, Terrifier 2
U or V: Upgrade
W, X, Y, or Z: X
pre-1920s: The Rough House (1917)
1920s: The Unknown (1927)
1930s: Baby Face (1933)
1940s: The Heiress (1949)
1950s: Winchester '73 (1950)
1960s: The House Is Black (1963)
1970s: Hedgehog in the Fog (1975)
1980s: Cinema Paradiso (1988)
1990s: Eve's Bayou (1997), A League of Their Own (1992)
2000s: Pontypool (2008)
2010s: Cinema Puerto Rico: Una antropología visual (2014)
2020s: The Empty Man (2020)
Action or adventure: Predator 2
Comedy: Hail, Caesar!
Documentary: Attica
Drama: The Secret of Roan Inish
Fantasy: Man of Steel, Malice in Wonderland
Horror: Near Dark
Musical: Little Shop of Horrors
Romance: Enough Said
Science-fiction: Predestination
Thriller: Pontypool
War: Héroes de Otra Patria
Western: The Searchers
Animated: The Mitchells vs. the Machines
Sequel: Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022)
Third part on a franchise: Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Film noir: The Woman in the Window
Ranking includes #1: Sherlock, Jr. (#122)
Ranking includes #2: Assault on Precinct 13 (#826)
Ranking includes #3: Midnight Cowboy (#336)
Ranking includes #4: They Live (#947)
Ranking includes #5: Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (#506)
Ranking includes #6: I Walked with a Zombie (#634)
Ranking includes #7: Night and Fog (#187)
Ranking includes #8: All That Heaven Allows (#378)
Ranking includes #9: The Thing from Another World (#984)
Ranking includes #10: Dawn of the Dead (1978, #310)
Ranking includes #11: Eyes Without a Face (#311)
Ranking includes #12: Walkabout (#712)
Haiti (January 1): Profit & Nothing But! Or Impolite Thoughts on the Class Struggle
Lithuania (February 16): Brotherhood of Pate
Bangladesh (March 26): Photographs of a School Teacher
Senegal (April 4): Black Girl
Ecuador (May 9): Ratas, Ratones, Rateros
Iceland (June 17): Undying Love
Vanuatu (July 30): Tanna
India (August 15): U-Turn
Guatemala (September 15): La Llorona
Uganda (October 9): The Girl in the Yellow Jumper
Latvia (November 18): Dramatic Ending, Deviate, The Letter, Vertigo
Bahrain (December 16): Cloven
Jim Jarmusch (January 22): Down by Law
Ida Lupino (February 4): Outrage
Raúl Juliá (March 9): Romero
Jackie Chan (April 7): Armour of God
Frank Capra (May 30): It Happened One Night
Sidney Lumet (June 25): The Anderson Tapes
William Wyler (July 1): Ben-Hur
Nicholas Ray (August 7): Johnny Guitar
Pedro Almodóvar (September 25): La concejala antropófaga, The Human Voice
Ed Wood (October 10): Bride of the Monster
Henri Georges Clouzot (November 20): The Wages of Fear
John Cassavetes (December 9): Shadows
First Best Picture winner I hadn't seen: Cavalcade
First film from any director: Piranha II: The Spawning (James Cameron)
Last film from any director: The Dead (John Huston)
Last Best Picture winner I hadn't seen: Driving Miss Daisy
African-Americans (Black History Month, February): Selma
Couple's name (Valentine's Day, February 14): Alpha and Omega
Female director (Int'l Women's Day, March 8): The Power of the Dog (Jane Campion), CODA (Sian Heder)
Mothers (Mother's Day, May): Where You Are, The Mother
Fathers (Father's Day, June): Brats
LGBTQ+ (Pride Month, June): Drawings of My BF
Native Americans (Native American Day, September 25): In the Beginning was Water and Sky
Biblical film (Holy Week, April): *only category I didn't complete. Go figure*
Islamic characters (Eid al-Adha, July 19): Listen
Holiday/Christmas: Prep & Landing
Spring: Palm Springs
Summer: Summer School
Fall: The Fall
Based on a Book (Nat'l Library Week, April): My Dog Skip, Dolores Claiborne
Environment (Earth Day, April 22): One Earth
Train (Nat'l Train Day, May 10): Runaway Train
Aliens (World UFO Day, July 1): The Day the Earth Stood Still
School (Back to School, August): Picnic at Hanging Rock
Senior citizens (Nat'l Senior Citizens Day, August 21): Amour
A virus (Virus Appreciation Day, October 3): 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later
Werewolves (Worldwide Howl at the Moon Night, October 26): The Wolf of Snow Hollow
Politics (Election Day, November 8): All the King's Men
Bird's name (Nat'l Bird Day, May 4): Antes que cante el gallo
America (Independence Day, July 4): Wet Hot American Summer
Rock, Paper, Scissors (World Rock Paper Scissors Day, August 27): Paperman
Punctuation symbol (Nat'l Punctuation Day, September 24): What's Opera, Doc?
Pronoun (Int'l Pronouns Day, October 19): I Saw the Devil
Time (Daylight Savings Time, November 6): Party Time: The Movie
400 Petals
A Gun for George
Adventures in Babysitting
Be Natural: The Untold Story of Alice Guy-Blaché
Beat the Devil
Belfast
Blade Runner
The Boss Baby: Get That Baby!
The Cabbage-Patch Fairy
Casi Casi
The Chucko
City of the Living Dead
Correa Cotto: ¡así me llaman!
Demons
Devil
Foreign Correspondent
The Godfather
Goodnight Mommy
La Gran Fiesta
Halloween II (1981)
The Heart of the World
It's All Right, It's OK
Jason X
Jurassic World Dominion
Kung Fu Hustle
Land and Shade
Lightyear
Luck
Mad Love
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Mad Max: Fury Road
Madame's Cravings
Maldeamores
Magical Girl
The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh
The Night Eats the World
Nightmare Alley (2021)
The 9th Circle
Peninsula
Robin Robin
Romance Tropical
Safety Last!
Seconds
Shadow of a Doubt
Star Wars
Strings
Suspense.
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Terminator Salvation
Thunder Road (2016)
Thunder Road (2018)
The Tragedy of Macbeth
True Romance
Un obus partout
Us
West Side Story (2021)
Whiplash
Rewatches are in blue, short films in red.
For what it's worth, I already finished the January bit, and I'm about to start the February one. I just didn't have time to put out the thread properly before.
SpelingError
02-06-23, 04:52 PM
Looking forward to this :up:
rauldc14
02-06-23, 04:58 PM
I too look forward to this
Thanks. I will still use the previous thread for two pending December reviews, but then I'll start pouring here my January reviews.
If you, MoFo's, check this list of what I saw last year, you'll see how much MoFo has influenced my movie-watching :laugh:
Just for kicks, here is a kinda comprehensive list of everything I saw during the year: a total of 200 films; a bit more than the 163 I saw in 2021 (thank you, short films!). Anyway, here it is...
One: One Week
Two: Two Mules for Sister Sara
Three: Three Amigos!
Four: Four
Five: Five Easy Pieces
Six: Six Men Getting Sick
Seven: Seven (also a rewatch)
Eight: 8 Mile
Nine: The 9th Guest
Ten: Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Eleven: Ocean's Eleven (1960)
Twelve: Twelve Hours to Kill
A or B: Ben-Hur (1907), The Block Island Sound
C or D: Cure, Don't Look Up
E or F: Encanto
G or H: Gonjiam: Haunted Asylum
I or J: Inside Llewyn Davis
K or L: Kung Fury
M or N: Nu
O or P: Prey, Parenthood
Q or R: Rejected
S or T: Satan's Slaves, Terrifier 2
U or V: Upgrade
W, X, Y, or Z: X
pre-1920s: The Rough House (1917), Pierrette's Escapades (1900), The Consequences of Feminism (1906), Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory (1895), Roundhay Garden Scene (1888), Sallie Gardner at a Gallop (1878)
1920s: The Unknown (1927)
1930s: Baby Face (1933)
1940s: The Heiress (1949)
1950s: Winchester '73 (1950)
1960s: The House Is Black (1963)
1970s: Hedgehog in the Fog (1975)
1980s: Cinema Paradiso (1988)
1990s: Eve's Bayou (1997), A League of Their Own (1992)
2000s: Pontypool (2008)
2010s: Cinema Puerto Rico: Una antropología visual (2014)
2020s: The Empty Man (2020)
Action or adventure: Predator 2
Comedy: Hail, Caesar!
Documentary: Attica
Drama: The Secret of Roan Inish
Fantasy: Man of Steel, Malice in Wonderland
Horror: Near Dark
Musical: Little Shop of Horrors
Romance: Enough Said
Science-fiction: Predestination
Thriller: The Platform
War: Héroes de Otra Patria
Western: The Searchers
Animated: The Mitchells vs. the Machines
Sequel: Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022)
Third part on a franchise: Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Film noir: The Woman in the Window
Ranking includes #1: Sherlock, Jr. (#122)
Ranking includes #2: Assault on Precinct 13 (#826)
Ranking includes #3: Midnight Cowboy (#336)
Ranking includes #4: They Live (#947)
Ranking includes #5: Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (#506)
Ranking includes #6: I Walked with a Zombie (#634)
Ranking includes #7: Night and Fog (#187)
Ranking includes #8: All That Heaven Allows (#378)
Ranking includes #9: The Thing from Another World (#984)
Ranking includes #10: Dawn of the Dead (1978, #310)
Ranking includes #11: Eyes Without a Face (#311)
Ranking includes #12: Walkabout (#712)
Haiti (January 1): Profit & Nothing But! Or Impolite Thoughts on the Class Struggle
Lithuania (February 16): Brotherhood of Pate
Bangladesh (March 26): Photographs of a School Teacher
Senegal (April 4): Black Girl
Ecuador (May 9): Ratas, Ratones, Rateros
Iceland (June 17): Undying Love
Vanuatu (July 30): Tanna
India (August 15): U-Turn
Guatemala (September 15): La Llorona
Uganda (October 9): The Girl in the Yellow Jumper
Latvia (November 18): Dramatic Ending, Deviate, The Letter, Vertigo
Bahrain (December 16): Cloven
Jim Jarmusch (January 22): Down by Law
Ida Lupino (February 4): Outrage
Raúl Juliá (March 9): Romero
Jackie Chan (April 7): Armour of God
Frank Capra (May 30): It Happened One Night
Sidney Lumet (June 25): The Anderson Tapes
William Wyler (July 1): Ben-Hur
Nicholas Ray (August 7): Johnny Guitar
Pedro Almodóvar (September 25): La concejala antropófaga, The Human Voice
Ed Wood (October 10): Bride of the Monster
Henri Georges Clouzot (November 20): The Wages of Fear
John Cassavetes (December 9): Shadows
First Best Picture winner I hadn't seen: Cavalcade
First film from any director: Piranha II: The Spawning (James Cameron)
Last film from any director: The Dead (John Huston)
Last Best Picture winner I hadn't seen: Driving Miss Daisy
African-Americans (Black History Month, February): Selma
Couple's name (Valentine's Day, February 14): Alpha and Omega
Female director (Int'l Women's Day, March 8): The Power of the Dog (Jane Campion), CODA (Sian Heder)
Mothers (Mother's Day, May): Where You Are, The Mother
Fathers (Father's Day, June): Brats
LGBTQ+ (Pride Month, June): Drawings of My BF
Native Americans (Native American Day, September 25): In the Beginning was Water and Sky
Biblical film (Holy Week, April): *only category I didn't complete. Go figure*
Islamic characters (Eid al-Adha, July 19): Listen
Holiday/Christmas: Prep & Landing
Spring: Palm Springs
Summer: Summer School
Fall: The Fall
Based on a Book (Nat'l Library Week, April): My Dog Skip, Dolores Claiborne
Environment (Earth Day, April 22): One Earth
Train (Nat'l Train Day, May 10): Runaway Train
Aliens (World UFO Day, July 1): The Day the Earth Stood Still
School (Back to School, August): Picnic at Hanging Rock
Senior citizens (Nat'l Senior Citizens Day, August 21): Amour
A virus (Virus Appreciation Day, October 3): 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later
Werewolves (Worldwide Howl at the Moon Night, October 26): The Wolf of Snow Hollow
Politics (Election Day, November 8): All the King's Men
Bird's name (Nat'l Bird Day, May 4): Antes que cante el gallo
America (Independence Day, July 4): Wet Hot American Summer
Rock, Paper, Scissors (World Rock Paper Scissors Day, August 27): Paperman
Punctuation symbol (Nat'l Punctuation Day, September 24): What's Opera, Doc?
Pronoun (Int'l Pronouns Day, October 19): I Saw the Devil
Time (Daylight Savings Time, November 6): Party Time: The Movie
400 Petals
A Gun for George
Adventures in Babysitting
Be Natural: The Untold Story of Alice Guy-Blaché
Beat the Devil
Belfast
Blade Runner
The Boss Baby: Get That Baby!
The Cabbage-Patch Fairy
Casi Casi
The Chucko
City of the Living Dead
Correa Cotto: ¡así me llaman!
Demons
Devil
Foreign Correspondent
The Godfather
Goodnight Mommy
La Gran Fiesta
Halloween II (1981)
The Heart of the World
It's All Right, It's OK
Jason X
Jurassic World Dominion
Kung Fu Hustle
Land and Shade
Lightyear
Luck
Mad Love
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Mad Max: Fury Road
Madame's Cravings
Maldeamores
Magical Girl
The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh
The Night Eats the World
Nightmare Alley (2021)
The 9th Circle
Peninsula
Robin Robin
Romance Tropical
Safety Last!
Seconds
Shadow of a Doubt
Star Wars
Strings
Suspense.
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Terminator Salvation
Thunder Road (2016)
Thunder Road (2018)
The Tragedy of Macbeth
True Romance
Un obus partout
Us
West Side Story (2021)
Whiplash
Rewatches are in blue, short films in red.
Ok, so while I catch up with all my reviews, here is an example of the new spin I'm giving to this challenge as well as the podcast.
The Movie Loot: The January Assignment (with Corey from The Film Effect Podcast) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12088164-the-movie-loot-the-january-assignment-with-corey-from-the-film-effect-podcast.mp3?download=true)
We recorded this episode of the podcast mid-January, and on it, me and my friend Corey chose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the error-filled :laugh: live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://youtu.be/xiNhZVt-AE4)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-january-assignment-with-corey/id1578191119?i=1000595836399), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/4i4jxPCkh6sOXlRH6YtXCj?si=fba8be9728fe4cd6), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjA4ODE2NA?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwjwn76CpYn9AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQNQ), or any other.
THE BIG SWALLOW
(1901, Williamson)
A film from before 1920
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyC7WXAkxx0
Mmmm, tasty cameraman!
FANTASMAGORIE
(1908, Cohl)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1d28X0lkJ4
This one was really impressive for 1908.
ELECTROCUTING AN ELEPHANT
(1903, Porter)
WARNING!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoKi4coyFw0
I really can't offer any excuse to why I watched this, other than completionism. It does offer a glimpse of what were the things being documented at the time, and how cinema was becoming a tool of preservation.
THE DANCING PIG
(1907, Mercury)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY69-S7O9Mo
This is another one I found really impressive, in terms of costume and choreography.
Just like last year, I started with a bunch of really old short films from early in the 20th Century. It's always really interesting to trace the evolution of cinema from these to what we experiment today.
BURN•E
(2008, MacLane)
https://i.imgur.com/SRbDS3K.jpg
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."
That quote is not on this short film, but it should definitely apply to this duty-driven, persistent little robot. Set in the Axiom ship, it takes place concurrently with the events of the second half of WALL•E. The short film follows the titular robot as he tries, tries again and again to repair one of the lights on the ship's hull.
Near the beginning of January, I went on a little Pixar/Disney shorts journey with my kids, and this was the first one we checked. I really enjoyed its simplicity of the story, as well as the personality that the short is able to give these little robots. The way it is weaved into the bigger story is fairly creative, and my kids had a lot of fun with it.
Something that I found interesting is that the director and co-writer, Angus MacLane, has been working with Pixar since the late 1990s; first as an animator on films like Toy Story 2 & 3, Cars, and Up, and then as part of their creative team since 2017. Just last year, he finally had the chance to direct his first feature film in Lightyear. Guess he took to that little robot in trying, trying.
Grade: 3.5
Captain Terror
02-14-23, 04:20 PM
The Dancing Pig film is in amazing condition given the age.
LOU
(2017, Mullins)
https://i.imgur.com/kaUlQK1.jpg
"You can only find the right way after you lost it."
Set in a school playground, Lou follows the titular creature, an unseen being that lives in the "lost and found" box, taking the shape of the different objects inside. When a bully starts stealing toys from other boys, Lou takes it upon itself to teach the boy a lesson, and maybe help him find his way in the process.
This is yet another Pixar short, so maybe you're wondering why I'm opening with a "philosophical" quote. I might be crazy, but I do think there's a bit of that in this short film, although obviously, adapted to a younger audience. The bully is only acting out because he's missing something, literally and figuratively, and stealing things from other kids is the only way he can feel closer to what he "lost".
Just like the bully had to dig deep in the box to find what he's missing, sometimes we can dig deep inside a short film like this, and find something that gets to us. I know it definitely seems like I'm over-analyzing this :laugh: but I really enjoyed the way the director put a message like that in a way that's simple, endearing, creative, and why not, deep.
Grade: 3.5
22 VS. EARTH
(2021, Nolting)
https://i.imgur.com/LNAco9E.jpg
"You have been selected to be members of an exclusive, secret organization whose only purpose is to prevent souls from going to the dumb planet known as Earth!"
Yet another Pixar short I put for the kids. Set before the events of Soul, it follows 22 (Tina Fey), a character living in a heaven-like realm where pre-existing souls are sent to Earth. However, this results in 22 losing all her friends as they each are sent to the "dumb planet". This causes her to resent the planet, and therefore organize a group of rebel souls against Earth.
I haven't seen Soul, so this is one where I felt I really didn't get the full impact of it. I mean, I did enjoy 22's attitude, and the interactions with the naive "rebel" souls were funny, but I don't think it worked alone as well as other "connected" Pixar short films. So take from that what you may. I might revisit it if and when I check out Soul.
Grade: 2.5
THE UNINVITED
(1944, Allen)
https://i.imgur.com/5ExEFkW.jpg
"Turn your back on the past and run, run hard."
"I'll go there somehow."
The past is a collage of memories and events; some of them pleasant, others not so much. But more often than not, we cling to them either way, for comfort, security, or just because we fear the uncertainty of the future. Those feelings are part of what is in the background of this 1944 gothic horror film.
The Uninvited follows siblings Rick and Pamela (Ray Milland and Ruth Hussey) as they deal with the potential haunting of their new house. Things are complicated when Stella (Gail Russell), the granddaughter of the original owner, who is deeply attached to the house and what it means for her becomes the target of some of these supernatural events.
It is Stella the one who has the above conversation with Rick, as he implores her to let go of the past. The film unfolds more like a mystery "whodunit" than a proper horror film, as Rick and Pamela investigate the source of the ghostly occurrences, which might be tied to Stella's mother and her mysterious death.
The pace at which the story moves is pretty effective, even if the resolution feels a bit undercooked. However, both the direction from Allen and the cinematography by Charles Lang, Jr. are stunning. There is some really solid use of the structure of the house, the stairs, windows, etc. along with the lighting and the shadows around it.
Milland and Hussey are pretty good as the leads. Their chemistry and sibling banter is believable. Unfortunately, Russell is pretty weak and her relationship with Milland doesn't feel real. The cast is rounded out by solid supporting performances from Donald Crisp as Stella's strict grandfather, and Alan Napier as the helpful doctor that joins Rick and Pamela in their investigation.
Finally, even though the film is labeled as a "gothic horror", the truth is that it plays more like a very light mystery, with lots of "jokey" one-liners, especially from Milland. However, I take it as a sign of the past and the era. Even if I would've preferred if the film played its cards more seriously, it still plays the cards it has well.
Grade: 3
FAR FROM THE TREE
(2021, Nourigat)
https://i.imgur.com/L13L5LY.jpg
"The apple doesn't fall far from the tree."
The above quote, often credited to Ralph Waldo Emerson, is used to describe the way children inherit traits and characteristics from their parents. Something that often puts us in an endless cycle of behaviors that we might have a hard time getting away from. However, the fact that this short is titled just "far from the tree" might mean that there are ways to distance ourselves from the source of some of these traits.
Directed by Natalie Nourigat, the short film follows a young raccoon and her father, as they search their surroundings for food. A chain of events, distractions, and carelessness lead to a face-off with danger, and then a cyclical repeat as we follow one of the characters years later repeating the same behaviors.
This is another short film I saw with my kids, and I was surprised by how emotionally profound it was. The simple way in which it presents themes of parent-child relationship, the way we discipline, and how we might find ourselves stuck in that inherited cycle, is both impressive and endearing.
Even with raccoon characters, it is something that made me look at myself and my perspective, both as a son and as a parent. How close or how far have I fallen from the tree? How close or how far should I be? and furthermore, how can I help my own children to distance themselves from things they should, and find their own way. There will be growing pains, there will be scars, but there's the hope that we can always right what needs to be.
Grade: 4.5
DESTINO
(2003, Monféry)
https://i.imgur.com/ovbqUBW.jpg
"A simple love story, where boy meets girl."
That's how Walt Disney himself described this surreal short film written by Salvador Dalí back in the mid-1940s. But seeing it recently, and knowing Dalí's work, it's everything but simple. Featuring animation inspired by Dalí's paintings, it's obvious that Disney knew this could be too much, which is why the project was shelved for a whopping 57 years, only to be unearthed in 2003.
Being as visual as it is, there's not much that can be written about Destino. There really isn't much of a narrative, even though it features a fluid visual story about several characters walking and dancing around desert plains, interacting with structures, bicycles, insects, clocks, marble statues, fire and God knows what else.
Nonetheless, it is a visually impressive short that manages to keep us engaged with its visual extravaganza. Even my short-attention-spanned kids seemed to be mesmerized by it, and even commented on their favorite sequence (the man bound by the glowing goo). So I guess it can be as simple as that.
Grade: 4
For those following and listening, here is a belated post about our Episode 77: The Opening Loot, where me and my friend Pete (from Middle Class Film Class Podcast) talk about the importance of an opening scene, and how they have to set the proper mood for the rest of the film. We also share our favorite opening scenes! Check it out!
The Movie Loot 77: The Opening Loot (with Pete from Middle Class Film Class Podcast) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12167811-the-movie-loot-77-the-opening-loot-with-pete-from-middle-class-film-class-podcast.mp3?download=true)
You can check it out on the above link, or on any of these podcasting platforms: Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/6UDAZ1pCzdXhgtdi8t0Kra?si=28f05170fd7c47db), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-77-the-opening-loot-with-pete-from/id1578191119?i=1000597929967), or any other. Thanks for the support!
A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET
THE DREAM CHILD
(1989, Hopkins)
https://i.imgur.com/zWBlAdu.jpg
"Your birth was a curse on the whole of humanity. I will not allow it to happen again."
A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child starts a year after the fourth part, with survivor Alice (Lisa Wilcox) trying to return to a normal life alongside his boyfriend Dan (Danny Hassel). Unfortunately, dreams of Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) start to haunt her and her friends again, so it's up to her to figure out not only how has Freddy returned, but also how to stop him for once and for all.
This is a film I hadn't seen it in a long time. For some reason, I always got it mixed up with Part 4. However, after rewatching it now, I can say they're very much different. Whereas The Dream Master was very "jokey" and silly, The Dream Child has a very different tone, more serious and darker, and I appreciated that.
The film is not completely devoid of the silliness that has plagued the franchise after the first film, but it does play its cards a bit better than Part 4. Here, the circle of friends feels more organic, and although the kills retain the same trend of using stereotypes and gimmicks to get rid of the characters, I didn't feel they were as "conveniently" telegraphed as the previous one.
The main issue with this film is the same issue that has been present in every single film of the franchise, and it is the fact that none of the writers or directors have known how to stick the landing (yes, not even Wes Craven) and finish Freddy in a way that feels like it makes sense.
The filmmakers also like to muddle up the mythology with weird stuff that wasn't mentioned before; in this case, Freddy's need for a baby to come back to life, or the many different ways they have had to kill him in the end; which leads to a flawed, but somewhat entertaining installment. It's not a curse on the whole of humanity, but they shouldn't have allowed it to happen again after this one.
Grade: 2.5
SUNRISE
A SONG OF TWO HUMANS
(1927, Murnau)
A film from the new Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time list whose ranking includes the #1 (#11)
https://i.imgur.com/BU8fGuX.jpg
"Wherever the sun rises and sets, in the city's turmoil or under the open sky on the farm, life is much the same; sometimes bitter, sometimes sweet."
That is the title card with which this iconic silent film opens; a statement about how life doesn't really change based on where you live or what you do. The pleasures and the struggles are the same. Those that live in the farm want to be in the city, those that live in the city crave the life in the country. That is a bit of what kickstarts this romantic drama into gear.
Sunrise follows a humble farmer (George O'Brien) that becomes infatuated with a "woman of the city" (Margaret Livingston) prompting him to leave his wife (Janet Gaynor) one night. Upon meeting with this woman, she convinces him to murder her so he can sell the farm and move with her to the city.
This film was a significant blindspot I had; I didn't even know specifically what it was about, so I was surprised to find out that the premise was a bit darker than I was expecting. I thought that was interesting. Most of what makes the film works happens in the first and the last act, where I think Murnau's direction is more effective. I really liked how well it was shot, the way he moved the camera, and how he staged some scenes where the man imagines himself "doing the deed".
Unfortunately, the film spends a lot of time in the middle act, which follows the man and woman spending the day at the city, going to the games, getting a haircut, buying clothes. I think they could've trimmed all that maybe 10, even 20 minutes. Especially since it dulls the edges of what preceded it.
I also thought the two lead performances were pretty good. Gaynor successfully conveyed the contrast of fear and forgiveness necessary from her character. However, I was particularly surprised by O'Brien, who really transmitted real shame and regret at what he wanted to do. The way he used his eyes and facial expression to do that was remarkable.
Fortunately, after the overlong middle act, things pick up again in the last act as the man has to come again face to face with the "woman of the city", so they can both face the consequences of their plan. I wish that middle act was handled a bit differently, so it could match with the two bookend acts, but I guess sometimes we have to deal with the bitter and the sweet.
Grade: 3.5
TAJOUJ
(1977, Gubara)
A film from Sudan
https://i.imgur.com/A1ODxTx.jpg
"Sitting beside my beloved is Heaven."
Sudan's history goes back thousands of years. From the late 19th Century to 1956, the country was under British control, during which cinema was controlled by British production companies and focused mostly on documentaries. When Sudan gained independence in 1956, the Sudan Film Unit was established opening the door for national films to be made.
Released in 1977, Tajouj came at a time where the Sudanese film industry was still in development, which obviously explains most of its shortcomings. Set in 19th Century Sudan, the film follows Mohallak (Salah ibn Albadya), a young man that falls in love with his cousin Tajouje. However, he has to face not only the refusal from her father, but also the jealousy of Ohag, another suitor interested in her.
This film was a challenge to me, especially because the only print I could find was a pretty bad one on YouTube. But to make matters worse, the white subtitles often got lost in the clear background, so more often than not, I couldn't tell what was being said, who was who, or what was what :laugh:
Despite this, I thought I was able to follow the basics of the plot. The editing was massively choppy, the performances weren't that good, but I still found it interesting, maybe from an anthropologic perspective. You know, watching young people trying to make a film in a country where the industry isn't fully developed.
The direction wasn't that bad either, and the story kinda picks up in the last act, which caught me a bit off guard. I was surprised at how it took a bit of a dark turn. So even if the execution wasn't that good, and the production values weren't fully there, I still thought it was an interesting and worthy watch.
Grade: 2
BLUE COLLAR
(1978, Schrader)
The first film from any director
https://i.imgur.com/z70nYbH.jpg
"They pit the lifers against the new boy and the young against the old. The black against the white. Everything they do is to keep us in our place."
Blue Collar follows Zeke, Jerry, and Smokey (Richard Pryor, Harvey Keitel, Yaphet Kotto), three workers at an auto factory in Detroit. Suffocated by the pressures from management, the low wages, and the inaction from the union, the trio decide to rob the union headquarters. However, they end up getting more than what they bargain for, as they end up uncovering ties from the union with organized crime, which might put their lives in danger.
This is the debut film from Paul Schrader, more known for writing Taxi Driver and recently directing First Reformed. It was recommended about a year ago by Slentert, when we were recording an episode on debut films for my podcast. I finally was able to get to it, and I'm so glad I did, because it was pretty darn good.
Like the above quote implies, the film ends up being a critique of the struggles of "blue collar" workers, as well as union practices, and more broadly, economy itself. It achieves this with a smart and engaging script that gives the three leads the opportunity to shine. I was particularly impressed with Pryor, who I had only seen in more comedic roles, but here he gets a chance in a role that's both serious and tragic.
There are many accounts of all the issues that happened during filming; from tension between the three leads as they each fought for the spotlight, to tensions with Schrader, who had a nervous breakdown after Pryor allegedly pulled a gun on him on set. That tension might've translated to the film, since there is a constant uneasiness and tension about what will happen to the characters.
Surprisingly, it didn't translate to their performances because, as much as they apparently hated each other, as far as the film goes you really believe these three guys are best friends. Blue Collar is a remarkable debut with some surprisingly good performances that manages to be funny, engaging, and powerful, all at the same time. Definitely recommended.
Grade: 4
SpelingError
02-17-23, 02:22 PM
Your thoughts on Sunrise are similar to my own. I'm always a sucker for silent films which get by on the strengths of their visual and aesthetic ingenuity, but from what I've seen, this is very hard to pull off as it often results in lulls in between the more striking scenes. Man With a Movie Camera is the only silent film I've seen which accomplishes this. Faust almost did as well with its perfect first half, but then the second half killed its momentum. Bummer :(
FREDDY'S DEAD
THE FINAL NIGHTMARE
(1991, Talalay)
https://i.imgur.com/RcMw8qW.jpg
"First, they tried burning me... Then they tried burying me... But this... this is my favorite. They even tried holy water!... But I just keep on tickin' "
That's what Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) tells Maggie (Lisa Zane), as he summarizes the many ways they've tried to kill him without success. This film then proceeds to unquestionably prove why they should've left him dead, instead of keeping him tickin'.
Freddy's Dead follows a group of troubled teenagers at a shelter that somehow end up being terrorized by Krueger. Led by Maggie, a therapist at the shelter, they discover various truths about Freddy's past, including the fact that he had a child. Whatever. The film is just a stupid excuse to pit a new batch of teenagers against Freddy, as he dispatches them one by one, in sillier ways.
This is a film I had seen a long time ago, and even as a teenager back then, I remembered thinking this was s-hit. It's somewhat comforting to confirm through this rewatch that I was right then, and that this is indeed s-hit. Putting aside the shortcomings of the genre or even the dubious approach to "psychology" in the story, the film is just plain bad.
From Zane's bad performance or the script's attempts to offer some sort of background to Freddy, to the awkward cameos from the likes of Roseanne & Tom Arnold, or the lame 3-D excuse and the awful CGI in the last act, the film is just a barrage of terrible, terrible decisions. Like some of the previous films, the logistics of how Freddy works doesn't make much sense, but here it is all paired with the mediocrity of everything and everyone involved.
The above picture is a perfect representation of the lengths of stupidity that the franchise has gone to as it has progressed. From a terrifying and nightmarish presence that could drag you through the walls while slicing you open, to a cackling clown using a freakin' "Power Glove" to make you endlessly go boing-boing around a room until you die. They tried fire and holy water, but they should've tried not writing this instead.
Grade: 0.5
Your thoughts on Sunrise are similar to my own. I'm always a sucker for silent films which get by on the strengths of their visual and aesthetic ingenuity, but from what I've seen, this is very hard to pull off as it often results in lulls in between the more striking scenes. Man With a Movie Camera is the only silent film I've seen which accomplishes this. Faust almost did as well with its perfect first half, but then the second half killed its momentum. Bummer :(
Those are two I haven't seen, but that are high on my watchlist. Have you seen The Last Laugh, also from Murnau? That one's my favorite silent film, and I think it manages to pull both the visuals and the emotional pretty well.
THE GREAT ZIEGFELD
(1936, Leonard)
The first Best Picture winner I haven't seen
https://i.imgur.com/N7e2Iue.jpg
"The great Mr. Ziegfeld, producer of the Follies, surrounded by hundreds of beautiful women, sitting on a bench holding hands, watching the riverboats go back and forth. Doesn't sound a bit like you, does it?"
The Great Ziegfeld follows the life of theatrical producer Florenz Ziegfeld (William Powell) from his humble beginnings as a "carny" and his subsequent succesful rise in Broadway, anchored by the notable Ziegfeld Follies, to his fall from grace due to financial problems and The Great Depression. It also chronicles his personal life, including his relationship with various women.
If you think that's a lot to cover on a film, it is. The 3-hour runtime is one of the main issues I have with the film; not because a film can't last 3 hours, but because this one feels massively bloated and all over the place. By trying to cover too much, it can't really focus on anything, so it basically feels like speeding through someone's highlights of life.
But length aside, the film is very well directed and crafted. It has several impressive musical numbers with some stunning choreographies and production values. If only they were shorter, there might be more of a chance to appreciate the film around them. It's funny how a film that it's made to celebrate the excesses of Old Hollywood indulges in the same excesses.
But my other main issue is in how the film presents Ziegfeld, and how it tries to lift up a man that is nothing more than a womanizing con man. Not because you can't make a film about a womanizing con man, but the film is clearly presenting him as someone noble and good, while brushing his faults under the carpet with a bit of a wink.
There are also some problematic and unnecessary instances of female objectification and grooming. There is a bit in particular with a young acquaintance of Ziegfeld that we meet as a child first, and then returns later as a young woman, that really rubbed me the wrong way. Especially because nothing is done with it other than chuckle at the "awkward" moment.
But credit where credit is due, Powell is very good in the lead role, so that might be a selling point if you're a fan of him. The supporting cast of Luise Rainer and Myrna Loy as Ziegfeld's wives, and Frank Morgan as Ziegfeld's rival, is also pretty solid. Unfortunately, there's not much in the story and beyond the spectacle for me to care about.
Grade: 2
SpelingError
02-17-23, 04:26 PM
Those are two I haven't seen, but that are high on my watchlist. Have you seen The Last Laugh, also from Murnau? That one's my favorite silent film, and I think it manages to pull both the visuals and the emotional pretty well.
Yeah, I think you recommended it to me a while back. I don't remember it too well, but I remember enjoying it quite a lot.
WES CRAVEN'S
NEW NIGHTMARE
(1994, Craven)
https://i.imgur.com/nPqwsj9.png
"You know, the fans, God bless them, they're clamoring for more. I guess evil never dies, right?"
That's how Robert Shaye (Robert Shaye) pitches a Nightmare on Elm Street sequel to Heather Langenkamp (Heather Langenkamp). The blessing and the curse of making a successful film is that fans will always want more, and the studios – being the business enterprises that they are – more often than not will bow to that, putting business interests above creative and artistic ones in the process.
New Nightmare is a bit of an exception to that. The film is set in a fictonalized version of "reality" where Langenkamp, along with other cast and crew members of the franchise, are being terrorized by Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) who is invading the real world. It is a unique meta approach that I'm sure wasn't an easy sell back in 1994, but that somehow works.
Craven does a great job of building the tension, while letting bits and pieces of the original film fall through the cracks into this "real world". There are some nice homages to most of the deaths from the original; from a character stabbed and dragged through the walls and roof to Freddy's glove sneaking next to the crotch of another character. It works perfectly to keep that tie between the original film and the "reality" of this film.
The film also gets rid of the wise-cracking Freddy that we saw in the previous 3 or 4 films, and it's obvious that Englund is having fun with the role (he has said it's his favorite). But I think Langenkamp, not only shows a lot of improvement, but overall does a pretty good job conveying the confusion, desperation, and ultimately resilience of her character in not letting this "evil" take over her life.
Like most of the films in the franchise, the last act does feel a bit weaker than the rest. As Heather gets more and more absorbed into Freddy's world, the limitations of that world that we've seen through pretty much all films also spill into this "new nightmare". Craven still manages to pull the reins a bit, but it does feel ultimately lacking and not as clever as the first two acts.
Craven managed to successfully "kill" Freddy for almost 10 years. That is until they pit him against Jason in 2003. Then, a 2010 remake brought him back to life, receiving almost universal criticism. A second remake has been allegedly in the works for the last 10 years. Even after Craven's passing in 2015, his estate has been evaluating different projects, from a sequel to TV show. I guess evil never dies, right?
Grade: 3.5
FREDDY VS. JASON
(2003, Yu)
A Friday the 13th film
https://i.imgur.com/PXEG7wu.jpg
"Oh, God, y'all, two killers? We're not safe awake or asleep."
The fight to end all fights! Freddy vs. Jason follows the two titular antagonists as they fight each other; something that had been in the minds of the studios since the 1980s. The film features a weakened and forgotten Freddy (Robert Englund), who resuscitates Jason (Ken Kirzinger) and sends him out to kill teenagers because somehow he thinks people will put the blame on him, allowing him to gain power and come back to life.
Yeah, whatever. Freddy vs. Jason, right? That's pretty much all that matters. Still, as silly as the whole premise is, I enjoyed seeing the hoops that the writers jump to join these two "universes". The fact that the end result is somewhat coherent AND fun is impressive, even if I generally feel it leans more towards the mood and style of the Nightmare on Elm Street films.
But anyway, the film is mostly fun, with some nice kills and cool setpieces thrown around. There's a scene where Jason interrupts a rave in the middle of a cornfield that is pretty cool. Then there are the two iconic fights between the two main baddies: first in Springwood and Freddy's boiler room, and finally at Crystal Lake. There is a certain amount of eye-rolling silliness, like Freddy bouncing Jason off of pipes and vents like a pinball machine, but at least it's stuff you can laugh at.
The film also suffers from some bad CGI effects, especially at one scene where Freddy takes the form of a worm to lure a stoner into death. Speaking of the stoner guy, did I even mention the "main characters" of the film? No? Well, it doesn't matter. I just know I had a lot of fun seeing these two go at each other. If you're a fan of any of these franchises, I don't see a reason why yo should skip this one.
Grade: 3
Late as hell, but finally! here's my summary for JANUARY 2023:
A film from the new Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time list whose ranking includes the #1 (i.e. 1, 19, 100): Sunrise (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372726-sunrise_a_song_of_two_humans.html) (#11)
The first film from any director you like: Blue Collar (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372748-blue_collar.html) (Paul Schrader)
The first Best Picture winner you haven't seen (starting forward from Wings): The Great Ziegfeld (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372806-the_great_ziegfeld.html)
A Friday the 13th film: Freddy vs. Jason (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373078-freddy_vs._jason.html)
A film from Sudan (Independence Day, January 1): Tajouj (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372737-tajouj.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/oj8ZW8jKXBSs8F1e5iWsTUeXSJW.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/7WBBcgzESyX1qEq9x7tg22dlORL.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/7wkIYI2r0ICajBcCW0JlIT3zSwc.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ffoBCQ7y63Tvo48HsJqr1XOiqiV.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/c3SoW2WBN5IDRRZ5VdZzmV7i3RF.jpg
Other watches:
Classic silent shorts: The Big Swallow (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2372076#post2372076), Fantasmagorie (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2372076#post2372076), Electrocuting an Elephant (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2372076#post2372076), The Dancing Pig (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2372076#post2372076)
Disney/Pixar shorts: BURN-E (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372098-burne.html), Lou (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372171-lou.html), 22 vs. Earth (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372185-22_vs._earth.html), Far from the Tree (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372495-far_from_the_tree.html), Destino (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372506-destino.html)
Nightmare on Elm Street rewatch marathon: A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372633-a_nightmare_on_elm_street_the_dream_child.html), Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372795-freddys_dead_the_final_nightmare.html), Wes Craven's New Nightmare (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373068-new_nightmare.html)
Others: The Uninvited (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2372486-the_uninvited.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/xBcai37vavGLEYQ8B1TSvO6pl9m.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gCJlm2VyH1tcJ3vx9yQU56Irhws.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/qHvPuoI3T0kTNBHUNLF5AUMLbzp.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/qgq9CfNoSM4KtGRRWvvZ2h99V9o.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/u3QfgRvkkY5cA0jTBslwBU9h2Bi.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zAQmOmQPWyvU34B3gcK163P4jmH.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/32vLDKSzcCMh55zqqaSqqUA8naz.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/39oaQUS0KxyXL6KYJ2o2u03PpHz.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/klOt8irNPS8EVgWgYk4MGy3JW0R.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zsCIUEdPKLO1GLJ2je9mKpPkQ70.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ffoBCQ7y63Tvo48HsJqr1XOiqiV.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/eN3UZUYapJ2CJCD9dN0LUZLouKa.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/uwp5ahLmWliRyX3mPoLHU7BKhf5.jpg
I think Blue Collar was probably the best, but some of those short films were really good; especially Far from the Tree.
Least favorite, Freddy's Dead quite easily.
Now that I'm finally caught up with all my January reviews, here is my second "assignment" episode on this new format I'm doing for the podcast.
The Movie Loot: The February Assignment (with Frank from Silver Screeners) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12222905-the-movie-loot-the-february-assignment-with-frank-from-silver-screeners.mp3?download=true)
In this one, my friend Frank Mandosa joins the loot as we choose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfiapX4edzw)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-february-assignment-with-frank/id1578191119?i=1000599087179), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/4Z5t2hguDEdseI3ugk4b5p?si=8f4f4df9d176455e), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjIyMjkwNQ?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwiAsfSi7KH9AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAQ), or any other.
Here are the criteria for FEBRUARY 2023:
A film with Jack Lemmon (born February 8):
A film about an inventor (Nat'l Inventors Day, February 11):
A film with the name of a couple in its title:
A film from Masaki Kobayashi (born February 14):
A film from Kuwait (National Day, February 25):
Carlo on video!
Will have to catch this asap...
Carlo on video!
Will have to catch this asap...
Still have to find my groove for these live shows, but it's fun. I very much prefer the audio edited version :laugh:
DEAD MAN'S LETTERS
(1986, Lopushansky)
https://i.imgur.com/Bmwow61.jpg
" 'Look, o you shall see a star'. But there were no stars in the sky for the darkness took over the world."
This line, delivered towards the end of this bleak, post-apocalyptic drama from the Soviet Union, highlights what I think is the main line of thought of the film; the idea of transmitting hope in spite of everything against it. Set in this post-nuclear wasteland, Dead Man's Letters follows Larsen (Rolan Bykov), a professor determined to find hope somewhere, anywhere.
But how can we find hope when everything around us is in ruins? When everybody is telling us it is futile? When all our loved ones are gone? The film presents us a world that seems completely beyond hope, as people are forced to live underground, while wearing protective clothing and gas masks outside to keep them safe from the polluted air, the dirty water, and the scattered carcasses.
Although the slim hopes of most people rely on the existence of a "central bunker", Larsen is sure that there has to be more outside of that. Released towards the end of the Cold War, this seems like a very clear analogy of the centralized aspect of communism in the Soviet country; something that results in fewer resources, and therefore fewer chances to "survive" outside of this "centralized" system.
I do wish that the character of Larsen would feel more real, more relatable. The film goes for a bit of a more cold and distant approach that keeps its characters at a distance. And even though the despair and hopelessness of the situation does come through, I feel that a more emotional and character-driven approach could've been more powerful.
At several points, Larsen interacts with a group of orphaned children that have been discarded and pretty much left to die. It is in them that Larsen sees the hope of a future in this world, and it is to them that he shares the above story about "a star". Maybe he saw it, maybe not, but when darkness takes over, sometimes we have to hold on to the hope that that star is there.
Grade: 4
CREATURE WITH THE ATOM BRAIN
(1955, Cahn)
https://i.imgur.com/eDURbuj.jpg
"My theory was to use these creatures to help people live, by doing everything that was difficult and dangerous. You just want to see people die."
Creature with the Atom Brain follows police doctor Chet Walker (Richard Denning) as he tries to stop atom-powered creatures unleashed by Frank Buchanan (Michael Granger), a criminal on the run that wants to get revenge on his enemies. To do this, Frank has recruited ex-Nazi scientist Wilhelm Steigg (Gregory Gaye) whom he is forcing to work for him.
This is the second film from Edward L. Cahn I've seen in the last 2 months; the first one being another B-movie titled 12 Hours to Kill. There is something very pleasant and comforting about his economical approach to these two. If it has to do with skill or just the limitations of the film, I don't know. The truth is that both films work really well for what they are.
The tension in the film is well handled and Buchanan makes for a decent, moustache-twirling villain. The creatures, with their Frankenstein-like stitched heads, might seem silly but I found their mindless lumbering to be creepy enough within the setting. I also liked the way they tried to explain the logistics behind the brain implant that allows Buchanan and Steigg to control them.
Denning is also pretty effective as the lead, although he acts more like a detective than a police doctor. The 69 minute length is also a big plus, considering what the film has to work with. Some other films would've bothered with senseless exposition, or bloated backstories, but from the opening scene, Cahn knows what we're here for. We just want to see people die.
Grade: 3.5
SpelingError
02-20-23, 03:02 PM
DEAD MAN'S LETTERS
(1986, Lopushansky)
Never heard of it.
Never heard of it.
You wouldn't get it.
FAT GIRL
(2001, Breillat)
https://i.imgur.com/oomtWQf.jpg
"No one would think we're sisters. lt's true. We don't take after anyone. It's like we're born of ourseIves."
Fat Girl follows the relationship of sisters, Anaïs and Elena (Anaïs Pingot and Roxanne Mesquida) as they each face their respective coming-of-age issues and sexual awakening in very different ways. The contrast between both is the central focus of this drama from Catherine Breillat.
As Elena herself says in the above quote, they are very much different. Anaïs is 12-year old, "chubby", and leaning more to the shy/introvert side albeit with a bitter cynicism to her, while Elena is 15-year old, skinny, and bolder in her approach to men, with a certain dose of wickedness. But as "daring" as Elena presents herself, she is actually waiting for the right man to lose her virginity. Anaïs, on the other hand, says she wants her first time to be "with nobody. I don't want a guy bragging he had me first."
The film extends that juxtaposition also to how supporting characters approach and treat the sisters. From Elena's new "boyfriend" (Liberto de Rienzo) to a key character in the last act, we are left to wonder on the differences and similarities between both treatments, and how much lies, deceit, and violence play into the "game".
It is the last act what might separate the film from being a masterpiece to some or a disappointment to others; the ones that love it from those that might hate it. It is most definitely one that's filled of unexpected tension, and a twist that feels completely out of left field (but is it?). Regardless of where you fall, I give Breillat heavy props for unapologetically throwing it out and just let the chips fall where they may.
Grade: 4
KRAMER VS. KRAMER
(1979, Benton)
A film with a couple's name in its title
https://i.imgur.com/RilJjsF.jpg
"I've had a lot of time to think about what it is that makes somebody a good parent, you know. It has to do with constancy. It has to do with patience. It has to do with listening to him. It has to do with pretending to listen to him when you can't even listen any more. It has to do with love."
Kramer vs. Kramer follows the struggles of Ted Kramer (Dustin Hoffman), after his wife Joanna (Meryl Streep) abandons him and their 7-year-old son, Billy (Justin Henry). As Ted copes with this, he has to learn to find some balance between his professional career, his personal life, and his duties as a parent.
Released in the late 1970s, I have to assume that this film stirred up some controversy, primarily for the way it challenges conventional gender roles. The wife and mother is the one that leaves, and the father has to learn how to take care of themselves. In that respect, the film is totally about Ted and Billy. Personally, I think I would've preferred a more balanced approach to both parents AND child, but technically, that would've been a very different film.
As it is, I really appreciated the way that the film portrayed Ted's growth as a parent, and in his relationship with Billy. Also, the moments where we see the kid trying to internalize and rationalize the abandonment and this clash between his parents were heartbreaking. There are a couple of scenes that are obviously put in there to highlight that contrast; the two breakfast scenes, or the scenes when Ted's walking Billy to school. As obvious as they are, I think they work, mostly because of the excellent performances from Hoffman and Henry.
I think that the film loses a bit once they bring Joanna back in the last act, mostly because you clearly see that the script is not on her side. Apparently Meryl Streep advocated for a more sympathetic portrayal of her character, and Hoffman fought her on it. But that is perhaps the more "benign" clash that they had. Streep has claimed that Hoffman groped her, slapped her, and harassed her, allegedly as part of his "method acting". Obviously, all of that means Hoffman is an a$$hole, but he's a talented a$$hole, and he very much shows that in here.
Streep also does a great job with what she gets, but like I said, this is Ted and Billy's story, and I was completely caught up in that. Being the son of divorced parents, but also being a "struggling new parent", I can confirm it has to do with constancy, it has to do with patience, it has to do with listening, even when you can't listen any more. But more important, it has to do with love.
Grade: 4
ATTACK OF THE CRAB MONSTERS
(1957, Corman)
https://i.imgur.com/Ty9oDV8.jpg
"Jim, you don't know what's down there!"
"What could be other than earth, water and few land crabs?"
After all, what can a few land crabs do? Well, that's what Attack of the Crab Monsters wants to answer. The film follows a group of scientists sent to a remote island in the Pacific Ocean to study the effects of nuclear tests. What they eventually find is that the island is inhabited by mutated giant crabs that take over the minds of their victims.
There is an undeniable charm to these creature features that were made during the time (which I suppose is the reason why this HoF is so appealing to some of us). Part of it had to do with the fears of the moment, i.e. radiation, nuclear power; but another big part of it has to do with the "low budget" approach to these films. There's obviously a bit of both in this one.
Most of the focus falls on biologist couple Dale and Martha (Richard Garland and Pamela Duncan), and technician Hank (Russell Johnson). There are even hints at a love triangle between them, but it all ends up being pointless. Like modern slashers, the rest of the cast are more or less disposable, with the real stars of the film being the giant crabs.
The goofy design of the crabs, with the almost "googly" eyes, just adds to that, uhh, charm. However, I really don't understand the purpose for having the crabs take over the minds of their victims, as opposed to have them be just "killer giant crabs". But putting that aside, Corman does a solid job keeping a nice pace to things, especially considering that the only thing we have here is earth, water, and a few land crabs.
Grade: 3
THE IMITATION GAME
(2014, Tyldum)
A film about an inventor
https://i.imgur.com/jOODyd4.jpg
"Sometimes it's the very people who no one imagines anything of who do the things no one can imagine."
The above quote anchors the life of Alan Turing, as told by The Imitation Game. The quote makes a reference as to how people that are underestimated are sometimes the ones that end up doing really great things. However, it seems that the film takes some, uhh, liberties in portraying how "underestimated" Turing was at the time, and that's just one of the many liberties the film takes.
The film follows Turing (Benedict Cumberbatch) through three different times in his life: his teenage years at boarding school, his time serving the British government during World War II, and his secluded adulthood after the war, in the early 1950s. The story moves back and forth between these three timelines as we see how he was, how he is, and how he would be; at least according to screenwriter Graham Moore.
The main focus of the story is on Turing's work on cracking the Nazi's Enigma code. Turing, who is portrayed as socially awkward, somewhat egocentric, and disliked by most people, is assigned to work with a team under the strict supervision of Commander Denniston (Charles Dance). At first, Turing and his work are dismissed and rejected by everyone around him, which goes back to the above quote, and how he eventually ends up cracking the code.
Another significant focus of the story lies on Turing's sexuality, and his relationship with a young Christopher Morcom during his school years, and with Joan Clarke (Keira Knightley), a cryptoanalyst that works close to his team during World War II. Him being a homosexual adds another layer to the above quote since this also added to him being dismissed by others.
Unfortunately, despite some of these broad strokes being accurate, a huge amount of what we see in the film is made up. Turing was not that socially awkward, there's no evidence he was bullied at school, he wasn't the first to crack German codes, he wasn't the sole inventor of the "cracking" machine, he had a good working relationship with his team, Denniston was supportive of him, and although there was a Russian spy at Bletchley Park, there is no evidence that they interacted. So, yeah, pretty much 80% of the film.
I know that films aren't meant to be documentaries, but even if we were to take it as a fictional account, the film follows the familiar beats of most biopics. Even Cumberbatch's portrayal seems like Oscar low-hanging fruit, considering that there is no evidence that Turing behaved like a "1940s Sheldon Cooper", but yeah, I guess that "sells". Still, the film is not awful, most of the performances are pretty good, and there are moments that work. So even if you can't imagine the film working for all the reasons above, to some extent, it does and there might be something for some people in there.
Grade: 2.5
TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A.
(1985, Friedkin)
https://i.imgur.com/0vKohAX.jpg
"I'm gonna bag Masters, and I don't give a shit how I do it."
That's the lengths to which Secret Service agent Richard Chance (William Petersen) will go to grab his man. To Live and Die in L.A. follows his attempts to arrest criminal Rick Masters (Willem Dafoe), a skilled but ruthless counterfeiter that is responsible for murdering Chance's partner. To do this, he has to reluctantly work with newly assigned partner, John Vukovich (John Pankow), a more straight-laced agent.
Released in 1985, this is as 80s as you can get. From its traditional plot of a cop set on revenge, paired with an opposite partner, to its gritty, Miami Vice-like ambience and overall feel. There is also a certain "sleaze" to its vibe, along with huge doses of ultra-violence that just makes it feel of a certain time.
Friedkin keeps the pace a bit on the restless side, so there isn't much of a chance to let your guard down. Maybe because of this, some cuts feel a bit abrupt, while also some subplots and storylines feel either underserved or end up falling by the side. One notable example is the subplot of Chance's informant/lover Ruth Lanier (Darlanne Fluegel).
My main issues, however, is with the character of Vukovich. I think Pankow was a bit miscast, but beyond that, I don't think the script gives him the depth and space that he needs; especially considering how important he becomes as the film progresses. It was halfway through the film that I kinda realized, "Oh, this is like an important guy. I thought he would be a 'red-shirt' nobody". Maybe that has to do with my expectations, or maybe with the way he was introduced and presented at first.
Chance, on the other hand, is cold and brooding. Petersen does a solid job with the character, and you believe that this guy doesn't really give a shit how he does things. Finally, Dafoe gives one of his committed performances, although I wouldn't have mind a bit more "crazy" from him. Finally, John Turturro gives a great supporting performance as one of Masters' men.
Despite some of the issues stated above, I really enjoyed this. I enjoyed the dark and gritty approach to things, and Friedkin did a solid job directing. It's worth mentioning that there's a particularly intense car chase that will keep you on the edge of your seat. The script has some issues, but a lot of the dialogue is sharp and cool, and there is a twist towards the end that's bound to make you go "what?!" Apparently, MGM executives weren't happy with it, but I guess Friedkin said "I'm gonna do it, and I don't give a shit how I do it."
Grade: 3.5
CURVE
(2016, Egan)
https://i.imgur.com/AJ4QZvK.jpg
"It's an alive space. It talks to her through those sounds and the screams. It wants her to fail, and it wants her to be... most important thing is it wants her to despair. It wants her to give up."
That's how filmmaker Tim Egan describes the setting of his eerie short film, Curve. Released in 2016, it follows a young woman (Laura Jane Turner) that wakes up on a ledge in a mysterious place. Injured, alone, and at the risk of falling to an abyss, the woman tries to desperately cling to life.
This is a short film I had seen a couple of years ago, and it certainly left a mark. I love the way it creates this creepy atmosphere through its minimalist visuals and the awesome sound design. Like Egan himself said, it all works to give this setting an almost antagonistic persona that is determined to make this woman give up and fall.
I had the fortune to talk with Egan for an upcoming episode of my podcast, and it was great to pick his brain about all the little details that he puts on this, and all his thought process while crafting such a cool short film. Curve is the very definition of "less is more".
Grade: 4.5
In case anybody wants to check it out, it's definitely worth it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dD3Fawk4y0
THE FOLLOW
(2001, Wong)
https://i.imgur.com/UG8OkPG.jpg
"If you get too close, move into their blind spot. If you lose them... just keep moving, hope for the best."
The Follow is one of several short films commissioned by BMW to serve as "glorified car ads" at the turn of the century. They follow a nameless driver (Clive Owen) hired to perform different tasks. What's notable is that they manage to nab big names and stars like Tony Scott, Guy Ritchie, Ang Lee, Gary Oldman, Don Cheadle, and in this case, Forest Whitaker, Mickey Rourke, and Wong Kar-wai.
In this one, the driver is hired to follow the wife of a paranoid, and probably abusive actor (Rourke). As he follows her Z3 aboard his BMW 328i *wink, wink* he narrates the intricacies of his job and the proper techniques to follow. But his musings, like the above quote, may also be about his personal life, his past or his current feelings. Some would say that a publicity tool like this doesn't have any business being as "deep" and "introspective" as this, but there it is.
The only other short I've seen from the series, Beat the Devil, was directed by Tony Scott, and it was 100% him; from the adrenaline and the sheer kinetic energy of it. I'm not an expert on Wong, but one can feel this is purely his flavor. As interesting as it is to watch, it is remarkable the way in which the business/marketing aspect of the short meets the artistic angle of the crew involved, and I'm all for it.
Grade: 3.5
Again, for those interested...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNoYLm3a-nI
Captain Terror
02-24-23, 04:00 PM
Curve is one of the more memorable short films I've seen in the past few years. Pretty sure you were the one that brought it to my attention the first time. I'm a sucker for that sort of simple one-location set up.
Looking forward to the interview.
SpelingError
02-24-23, 04:19 PM
I also watched Curve after Thief mentioned it a few years ago. I concur that it's very good.
(WHAT THE F*CK DO YOU MEAN)
WE BOUGHT A ZOO?
(2023, Sullivan)
https://i.imgur.com/6ZFQYs1.png
"You bought a zoo... Why would you do that?? What do you know about zoos??"
"I don't know. The-the usual amount. I-I-I know it has animals."
Zoos are magical places, with the ability to unite people, mend differences, and heal families... or at least that's what Matt Damon taught us. Which is why Harold (Doug Herbert) wants to buy a zoo in this silly, funny short film from my good friend, Todd Sullivan.
The film follows his enthusiastic presentation to his family, and their subsequent reaction. It is a very simple short, but for the most part, successful in what it wants to do. The comedic timing from Herbert is solid, and the rest of the cast does a good work, especially Kelsey Bell as the daughter.
There is a bit of "fancy" camera movement in the opening that looks great, but might feel a bit "too much" for how simple the short is. But considering that the bulk of it is just two static shots (Dad vs. the family), I think it gives some balance. But the highlight is in the script and the performances. Nothing groundbreaking, but effective.
Grade: 3
For anyone interested...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r42VXZ90sts
Curve is one of the more memorable short films I've seen in the past few years. Pretty sure you were the one that brought it to my attention the first time. I'm a sucker for that sort of simple one-location set up.
Looking forward to the interview.
I also watched Curve after Thief mentioned it a few years ago. I concur that it's very good.
Glad you both liked it! I'm currently editing the interview and will hopefully have it out before February ends.
A KILLER APP
(2010, Malicki-Sanchez)
https://i.imgur.com/umnUxVO.jpg
Greg: "Look, there was an accident last night. Jewel... died, and I connected a transmitter to the back of her neck, and I can control it from an app that I wrote for my phone... and it works. No one will ever know."
Randy: "Whatever"
That is precisely what this short film offers. A Killer App was made by actor/singer and friend Keram Malicki-Sanchez as a college project more than a decade ago. He shared it with me when I told him I was doing an episode on short films, and although it has some of the warts and wrinkles of a student project, it is still pretty funny in its silliness.
Like the above quote clearly says, the film follows Greg (Sean Ridgway), a computer "nerd" who ends up killing his nagging girlfriend (Aimee-Lynn Chadwick) in a moment of rage. After hooking her up with some electronics, he codes an app to control her from his cell phone. But things don't go as planned when their neighbor (Jon Sharkey) finds out about it.
The direction feels a bit frenetic at times, but there are some good moments of blocking and framing. Also, Ridgway is pretty good as the lead with some pretty effective deadpan delivery. A Killer App might have been just "a college project"... but it works.
Grade: 3
For anyone interested...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2INgQO7A8E
Also, check out some of Keram's music and videos. He directs all his videos and the music is really good.
PEE SOUP
(2021, Sullivan)
https://i.imgur.com/ceG2XjS.png
"I ordered pea soup"
"And... that is *exactly* what I brought you"
Pee Soup is yet another short film from my friend Todd Sullivan. It follows a diner (Carlo Sia) and a unique waiter (Matthew Che'z) in a... unique sidewalk cafe. Todd shared this with me a couple of weeks ago as well, and I've been laughing at it since. Maybe I'm an easy target, but I find pretty much everything in it perfect. The delivery and timing from both actors is on point, the music is perfect, and the way it subverts our expectations had me rolling. What can I say? It's a short film titled "pee soup", and that is *exactly* what it brings :D
Grade: 4
Enjoy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSy1Dpbi6yk
TOMATO
(2019, Sullivan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZiiLAqirB0
To-may-to? To-mah-to?
TOMATOES
(2019, Sullivan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oylyDYLFVPc
Do NOT open the door!
Finishing this batch of short films with two more from Todd Sullivan, both featuring an unlikely... companion.
THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS
(1953, Lourié)
https://i.imgur.com/pH89YJT.jpg
"A prehistoric animal would be presumptuous to be alive today and upset your neatly cataloged theories."
That is how physicist Thomas Nesbitt (Paul Christian) sums up another scientist skeptical reaction to the alleged appearance of The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, a prehistoric dinosaur awakened by a nuclear bomb test. The film follows Nesbitt's attempts to alert everybody after his first encounter with the beast in the Arctic. An encounter that everybody dismisses as a moment of delirium.
And there is a good deal of that skepticism, as Nesbitt goes around from his military friends to fellow scientists. He is eventually joined by Dr. Thurgood Elson (Cecil Kellaway) and his young assistant Lee (Paula Raymond), but the film takes almost an hour to finally confirm the existence of the beast to the higher uppers, when it is already too late.
But regardless of the scientific push-and-pull from the story, this is a film about a giant lizard wreaking havoc, and in that aspect, the film delivers. The special effects and stop-motion animation of the beast are quite impressive and wonderful to look at. One notable example is the moment when the beast destroys a lighthouse, which results in a very visually striking moment (hence my inclusion of it here), but the scenes in the city halfway through, or the closing ones in Coney Island are just as good.
The toxic blood in the last act was a nice twist, but I don't think the way it was executed and eventually solved was that effective. Still, at 80 minutes, the film doesn't overstay its welcome and offers enough destruction and solid special effects for any fans of the genre.
Grade: 3.5
THE DEADLY MANTIS
(1957, Juran)
https://i.imgur.com/NEhmMwF.jpg
"I'm convinced that we're dealing with a Mantis in whose geological world the smallest insects were as large as man, and now failing to find those insects as food, well... it's doing the best that it can."
The Deadly Mantis follows a team of scientists and military personnel as they try to find and stop the titular creature as it starts attacking several military bases in the North Pole. The military team is led by Col. Joe Parkman (Craig Stevens) and General Mark Ford (Donald Randolph), but they are joined by paleontologist Ned Jackson (William Hopper) and journalist Marge Blaine (Alix Talton).
I read an article on praying mantises that opened with the following sentence: "From extreme camouflage to sexual cannibalism". Obviously, this unique insect has fascinated people since forever, not only because of their appearance, but also for their behavior or skills, as mentioned on this quote. Unfortunately, this creature feature resorts to a more traditional portrayal of it as a big "anything", instead of capitalizing on its uniqueness.
The Deadly Mantis follows a template, and it does so fairly well. However, its pace is a bit more clunky than, say, The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms. At times, it feels like it kinda sputters often, before actually getting things going. In addition, none of the main characters are that memorable. There's also the frequent objectification of Marge, which we are meant to take in stride because she does so as well, all while dozens of soldiers ogle and leer at her.
The special effects are not as great as other similar films, but they are effective. Director Nathan Juren tries to make the most out of his limitations, while still giving us decent amounts of destruction and chaos. It's not enough to put this in the same category as other similar films, but well... it's doing the best that it can.
Grade: 2.5
Forgot to put this here yesterday, since it was "meant" to come out on the "short month", but this is the latest episode of the podcast, Episode 79: The Short Loot, where I talk with filmmaker Tim Egan. Known for directing the amazing short film, Curve, we talked about his career, his short film, and short films in general. We close sharing our favorite short films, and there is a notable presence of short films that came up during the Short Film HoF we did a while ago, so check it out!
The Movie Loot 79: The Short Loot (with Tim Egan) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12342382-the-movie-loot-79-the-short-loot-with-tim-egan.mp3?download=true)
You can check it out on the above link, or on any of these podcasting platforms: Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3avN3VtvqhbOuo0XEJ82O6?si=18d5febe61e649c5), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-79-the-short-loot-with-tim-egan/id1578191119?i=1000602223545), or any other. Thanks for the support!
I just released Special Episode 16 of The Movie Loot, where I talk about what is probably my favorite scene from The Godfather, and my second favorite from the franchise; the attempt against Vito Corleone at the hospital:
The Movie Loot - Special Episode XVI (The Godfather) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12365238-the-movie-loot-special-episode-xvi-the-godfather.mp3?download=true)
Remember you can also listen on Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-special-episode-xvi-the-godfather/id1578191119?i=1000602714917), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/5ls6n30Peecj4Oi9ukV5E6?si=dc9ae70e74174815), Google Podcasts, and most podcast platforms.
Today is #GrammarDay, so I had the opportunity to chat with podcaster and NY Times best-selling author Mignon Fogarty, also known as Grammar Girl on a bonus episode of The Movie Loot. We talked about grammar, podcasts, podcasts about grammar, and a little bit about films. Check it out!
Bonus Loot #3: The Grammar Loot (with Mignon Fogarty, a.k.a. Grammar Girl) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12371604-bonus-loot-3-the-grammar-loot-with-mignon-fogarty-a-k-a-grammar-girl.mp3?download=true)
Remember you can also listen on Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bonus-loot-3-the-grammar-loot-with-mignon-fogarty/id1578191119?i=1000602752169), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/07vSdeIHPj7EDdsF2QsqNj?si=09e9a2455de040f8), Google Podcasts, and most podcast platforms.
Captain Terror
03-05-23, 01:56 AM
Forgot to put this here yesterday, since it was "meant" to come out on the "short month", but this is the latest episode of the podcast, Episode 79: The Short Loot, where I talk with filmmaker Tim Egan. Known for directing the amazing short film, Curve, we talked about his career, his short film, and short films in general. We close sharing our favorite short films, and there is a notable presence of short films that came up during the Short Film HoF we did a while ago, so check it out!
The Movie Loot 79: The Short Loot (with Tim Egan) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12342382-the-movie-loot-79-the-short-loot-with-tim-egan.mp3?download=true)
You can check it out on the above link, or on any of these podcasting platforms: Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3avN3VtvqhbOuo0XEJ82O6?si=18d5febe61e649c5), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-79-the-short-loot-with-tim-egan/id1578191119?i=1000602223545), or any other. Thanks for the support!
Good stuff, seems like a cool guy. I was impressed with myself for having already seen so many of the films mentioned here, but I learned about a few new ones too.
And I second his rec of the Villeneuve film, if you haven't watched it yet.
https://youtu.be/t60MMJH_1ds
Good stuff, seems like a cool guy. I was impressed with myself for having already seen so many of the films mentioned here, but I learned about a few new ones too.
And I second his rec of the Villeneuve film, if you haven't watched it yet.
https://youtu.be/t60MMJH_1ds
Thanks! I found most of the shorts he mentioned, but really haven't had time to watch them. They're on the agenda, though.
THE CHINA SYNDROME
(1979, Bridges)
A film with Jack Lemmon
https://i.imgur.com/4YkAF9c.png
"In everything man does, there's an element of risk. So we have 'defense in depth'. That means two back-up systems. You saw it. There was no radiation leakage. The system works. Even with a faulty relay or a stuck valve... that system works. There was no accident."
That's how supervisor Jack Godell (Jack Lemmon) tries to convince reporter Kimberly Wells (Jane Fonda) that there was no accident at the Ventana Nuclear Power Plant. But is he trying to convince Wells, or is he trying to convince himself? That is what drives the story in this tense thriller.
The China Syndrome follows Wells and his cameraman Richard Adams (Michael Douglas) as they follow up on a potential nuclear emergency. After witnessing and incident that they believe could've led to a meltdown, they start uncovering a series of coverups taken by the administrators to cut corners in the plant maintenance. However, their efforts might put them all in danger.
This is a film I had been meaning to watch for a long time, but for whatever reason I hadn't. So I was glad that this month's challenge gave me the opportunity, and I jumped right at it. The film is definitely my kind of jam. I mean, an edge-of-your-seat thriller about a nuclear cover-up? Sign me up for that!
James Bridges, who wrote and directed, delivers a smart script and taut direction that relies more on slow, tense moments and conversations, rather than big, elaborate setpieces. When I read that he was also the writer of the underseen Colossus: The Forbin Project, it made sense. Here he uses similar "control room" interactions that put in the spotlight human's fallibility and our reliance on "machines" to do the job for us.
In addition to the script and direction, the film is helped by a hell of a cast. Fonda and Lemmon easily steal the spotlight, and their scenes together are among the best from the film. The cast is rounded up by solid supporting performances from Douglas, Wilford Brimley, James Hampton, and James Karen, among others.
My two main gripes happen in the last act. First, they insert an antagonist in one of the plant executives that feels a bit one-dimensional as a representation of the "corporate bad guys", and he does lean a bit into "moustache twirling". The second has to do with the very end, where a certain line of dialogue feels forced to assure the audiences that justice will be served and that these corporate "bad guys" will somehow pay.
But those are really minor gripes. The film does a great job of questioning the risks in the use of nuclear power and the lengths that some will go to keep things the way they are, all while delivering great performances in an all-around well-crafted film. Even with a last minute, one-dimensional antagonist or a forced closing line... it works.
Grade: 4
AL MAHT
(2021, Sayood)
A film from Kuwait
https://i.imgur.com/yADtONT.jpg
"Your father wasn't wrong, but you did what he said at the wrong time. Your friends weren't wrong either. But you took their advice at the wrong time. And mistakes build up. At some point, you regret that you didn't take some advice, and you don't go ahead with the next stage."
Since the moment we're born, life is a constant barrage of trial-and-error decisions. What to play, who to play with, what to eat, who to hang out with, where to study, what to study, where to live, who to marry... it's all an endless cycle of decisions to which, more often than not, we feel ill-prepared. And yet, we choose, and go ahead with the next stage.
Al Maht (or All Eyes on Him) is a Kuwaiti animated film that follows Tawfeeq (Sayood), a young man stuck on that cycle of decisions. The film starts with him as he's about to graduate high school, and follows his life as he tries to navigate some of the above questions of life.
This was certainly an interesting watch, especially because of how it tries to juggle different tones. On one hand, the film features some hit-and-miss comedy beats that are thrown at a frenetic, non-stop pace; but on the other hand, some of the themes that are explored regarding life choices and the effects they have for ourselves and those around us are relatively well presented.
Tawfeeq is an artistic young man that likes to draw. However, life takes him away from that path for different reasons, and he ends up sacrificing what he loves for what is considered a more regular life. But then again, life has ways to try to put you back on track, but only as new and different questions and choices arise.
I really appreciated the film's efforts to dive into these profound topics, but although I enjoyed a lot of the more fast-paced, juvenile humor, I wish the film would've "sat down" for a while at moments to allow some of these life ponderings sink a bit more, while also giving some of its subplots and storyline detours more space to breathe.
Grade: 3
RUNNING SCARED
(1986, Hyams)
https://i.imgur.com/iYeoOD7.jpg
Ray: "I think it's awfully sad to be talking about quittin'. It might look like we're scared."
Danny: "We're not scared. We're smart!"
That's one of the ways that Danny Costanzo (Billy Crystal) tries to rationalize to his partner his decision to retire from the force. Of course, you wanna think of yourself as being "smart", rather than "scared"; especially when you're a Chicago police officer. But can they follow through on their decision? That is the basis for this 1986 buddy cop film.
Running Scared follows Costanzo and his partner, Ray (Gregory Hines) as they try to track down dangerous drug lord, Julio Gonzales (Jimmy Smits). However, after the cops survive a shootout during a raid on a gun shipment for Gonzales, the two start to question their careers and start thinking about retiring early and opening a bar in Florida.
This is a film I'm baffled I had barely heard about, considering it came up in the 1980s, around the time I was watching stuff like Beverly Hills Cop and Lethal Weapon. But for some reason, this one seemed to get lost in the mix. The film follows more or less a similar vibe to those that I mentioned above, with the two partners usually going against the grain to capture the bad guys, while cracking one-liners in the process.
The thing that works about this film is that Hines and Crystal have an undeniable chemistry. Their banter is funny, cool, and infectious. You can also feel there's a dose of Crystal's ad-libbing, but it works perfectly. The film has a good dose of solid one-liners, and the supporting cast (that includes Joe Pantoliano and Dan Hedaya, among others) is pretty good.
What didn't work as well for me was the overall tone. There is a bit of a tonal dissonance to the plot that I just can't quite grasp. For starters, the two cops are shown to be pretty bold and fearless, often to the point of recklessness, during the first act, so their choice to "run scared" after a dangerous situation doesn't necessarily jive with the kind of cops we've seen them to be or the kind of film this is.
The thing is that the original idea for the script called for two "older cops" about to retire, which I think would've made more sense to the story. There is also a montage towards the middle of the film as they hang out in Miami during their forced vacation that feels weird and dated. Finally, a couple of romantic subplots between both cops feel underserved and, yes, weird (both of which involve woman that are married, or about to get married). But as far as a fun, light, buddy cop comedy with two wise-cracking cops with great chemistry, I guess it delivers.
Grade: 3
If you have 30 minutes before the Oscars start, then check out the FIRST HALF of the latest episode of The Movie Loot, where me and ApexPredator talk about the Oscars and our predictions for tonight's ceremony!
The Movie Loot 81: The Oscars Loot (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12424237-the-movie-loot-81-the-oscars-loot-with-brian-clarkson-from-tickets-please.mp3?download=true)
Look for it also on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, etc.
Later this week, I will spam you again with the SECOND HALF, but I was running against the clock, and this was the part that was relevant for today, so :shrug: :D
Checking out this latest loot with Apex right now!
THE THICK-WALLED ROOM
(1956, Kobayashi)
A film from Masaki Kobayashi
https://i.imgur.com/4JRfDEY.jpg
"War criminals are the masks of peace, worn by the merchants of death."
Set in the years after World War II, The Thick-Walled Room follows a group of Japanese soldiers imprisoned for crimes against humanity committed during the war. Throughout the film, they go from coping with the real guilt and regret of their actions to struggling and questioning the reasons for their imprisonment. Part of their resentment is reflected in the above line, which one of them quotes in the last act. I don't know where the quote comes from, but it seems to capture the way that these prisoners are being used as scapegoats for the decisions of higher-ranking officers and leaders, who they were following orders from.
This film was the first notable film directed by Masaki Kobayashi, who later in his career directed Harakiri, which I love so I really wanted to dive into something, anything else from him. The main group of prisoners we follow is comprised of mostly six soldiers, all from different backgrounds and different approaches to their situation. However, most of the focus falls on Yokota (Kô Mishima) and Yamashita (Torahiko Hamada), both of which are struggling with family situations back in their homes that are directly or indirectly tied to them being imprisoned. These include financial difficulties for lack of a provider, the social stigma of their situation, serious illnesses, or the continuing clash against the current government.
Overall, the film has an interesting and thought-provoking premise. Most of these subplots are quite serious and profound, especially coming from Kobayashi, who was a war prisoner himself. Unfortunately, his decision to spread the narrative among so many characters results in the plot feeling somewhat scattered and without focus. There are also a few expository sequences that feel clunkily written, and the pace of the film is not as tight as it should have. There are some solid performances, though, and Kobayashi does craft some powerful images and moments. There's a scene in particular that stuck with me, where a character is being haunted by visions and images of the crimes he committed as the walls around him break down in a hallucinatory sequence.
Overall, I was pleased with this film. There is a powerful message on how society perceives this people and the way guilt is put upon them as a burden they can't carry, even if they're not the ones directly responsible for it. Kobayashi shows promise as a director with some neatly constructed sequences and visuals. I just wish that the script and the overall execution was better, because I believe that deep down there's a really great film here; perhaps behind a thick-wall.
Grade: 3
Checking out this latest loot with Apex right now!
I plan to upload the second half some time today, so if you do check it out, make sure you come back later to listen to the second half.
Again, late as hell posting this, but here's my summary for FEBRUARY 2023:
A film with Jack Lemmon (born February 8): The China Syndrome (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2376493-the_china_syndrome.html)
A film about an inventor (Nat'l Inventors Day, February 11): The Imitation Game (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373981-the_imitation_game.html)
A film with the name of a couple in its title: Kramer vs. Kramer (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373820-kramer_vs._kramer.html)
A film from Masaki Kobayashi (born February 14): The Thick-Walled Room (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2377970-the_thick-walled_room.html)
A film from Kuwait (National Day, February 25): All Eyes on Him (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2376502-al_maht.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/uHwwQIlt4XwpTFhX9ZT1A8xSW7F.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zSqJ1qFq8NXFfi7JeIYMlzyR0dx.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/6IVQjDTbr7pXx2AR8jovbYwpyiF.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/qQNHosbsNUG58YtU0hlFjWGftAY.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gSInUMgFvXpKE8Tg3mkTWdegajh.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
30th Hall of Fame: Dead Man's Letters (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373315-dead_mans_letters.html), Fat Girl (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373731-fat_girl.html), To Live and Die in L.A. (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374058-to_live_and_die_in_l.a..html)
1950s Creature/B-movies: Creature with the Atom Brain (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373370-creature_with_the_atom_brain.html), Attack of the Crab Monsters (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2373832-attack_of_the_crab_monsters.html), The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374998-the_beast_from_20000_fathoms.html), The Deadly Mantis (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2375054-the_deadly_mantis.html)
Short films: Curve (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374418-curve.html), The Follow (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374439-the_follow.html), (What the F*ck Do You Mean) We Bought a Zoo? (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374477-what_the_fck_do_you_mean_we_bought_a_zoo.html), A Killer App (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374586-a_killer_app.html), Pee Soup (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374596-pee_soup.html), Tomato (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2374601#post2374601), Tomatoes (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2374601#post2374601)
Others: Running Scared (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2376750-running_scared.html) (1986)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/eHnIdMNPBvCsZFmoq9q2knRRaQb.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/afzbY1h7huuxlITigPfcyQSkqLs.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/2iW3pSihBIhXjnBQmUJ0mAiZbB5.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/71ZgmkyVQpaOK9TSCzR8qmhZAto.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/pDaJt3Jv41mOvND7HaDnmiGsD5V.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/a45mCN6BUPg0JHVnprDOPc2VIST.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/nYOhWqHjgiUFI4iGOsNa5PC6Yun.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ehQdA0835DFN6Jsv7uUWcDEJZMx.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/tId2FLJf6sRZzhhHcMhvWpKv9fm.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/rOF6MKAoAmd8XeqSa3pq9eBP5fF.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/1le7Sg6ruQLNxdMDK7L9OVZJ6jA.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/oBPvFaGS8zYHA9xvX6rzkwAVr81.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/l5rUquwpEmakiRtQf0YRZJMzESQ.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/of6LgPeqIKd28Ha3nYWimxC9AbC.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/tQshSrj0G5o9xElzEnBcMVHAutE.jpg
Not counting rewatches, I think the one I enjoyed the most was probably The China Syndrome, but a case can be made for Kramer vs. Kramer, Fat Girl, or Dead Man's Letters. All very solid films.
As for the weakest, ehhh, probably The Imitation Game or The Deadly Mantis. None really awful, though.
If you have 30 minutes before the Oscars start, then check out the FIRST HALF of the latest episode of The Movie Loot, where me and ApexPredator talk about the Oscars and our predictions for tonight's ceremony!
The Movie Loot 81: The Oscars Loot (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12424237-the-movie-loot-81-the-oscars-loot-with-brian-clarkson-from-tickets-please.mp3?download=true)
Look for it also on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, etc.
Later this week, I will spam you again with the SECOND HALF, but I was running against the clock, and this was the part that was relevant for today, so :shrug: :D
If anybody listened to this latest episode of The Movie Loot, then make sure you dive back in for the second half. After our Oscars talk, me and ApexPredator play a little "speech" game, and then share our Top 5 Best Picture nominees that DIDN'T win through history. Check it out!
The Movie Loot 81: The Oscars Loot (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12424237-the-movie-loot-81-the-oscars-loot-with-brian-clarkson-from-tickets-please.mp3?download=true)
As usual, you can also check it out on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/1JduPcCSZglC58hWoWTaxx?si=Z041aBM-QaGncn11JO6w9A), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-81-the-oscars-loot-with-brian/id1578191119?i=1000603819506), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjQyNDIzNw?sa=X&ved=0CAgQuIEEahcKEwjo4fD0s9_9AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), or any other podcast/audio streaming service.
If anybody listened to this latest episode of The Movie Loot, then make sure you dive back in for the second half.
Caught up with part 2 this morning. Great episode!
Caught up with part 2 this morning. Great episode!
Thanks for checking it out!
I already had this up on the first page, I think, but here is my third "assignment" episode of the new format I'm doing for the podcast.
The Movie Loot: The March Assignment (with Stew from SWO Productions) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12482047-the-movie-loot-the-march-assignment-with-stew-from-swo-productions.mp3?download=true)
In this one, my friend Stew joins the loot as we choose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hog2lhcvhOI)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-march-assignment-with-stew/id1578191119?i=1000605096686), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/1pH3A2AxnDfK7gJRvuOV5T?si=f6721a42abd946da), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjQ4MjA0Nw?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwiYoa_K_uv9AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQNQ), or any other.
Here are the criteria for MARCH 2023:
A film from South Korea (March 1st Movement):
A film with the number 3 (Three, Third, etc.) in its title:
A film from Akira Kurosawa (born March 23):
A film from Spike Lee (born March 20):
A film with the word "Time" in its title (Daylight Savings Time, March 12):
THE FLYING SAILOR
(2022, Forbis & Tilby)
https://i.imgur.com/1ZsNTGa.png
"I remember meeting pieces of timber and wood; I was quite conscious; I felt the water; I thought I was under the bottom of the sea somewhere."
The above is part of the actual statement of Charlie Mayers, the sailor that is subject of this mesmerizing short film. Inspired by the events of the disastrous Halifax Explosion of 1917, the film follows the titular sailor, as he is witnesses the explosion caused by the collision of two boats, which eventually sent him "flying" through the air and into a hill 2 kilometers away; an event he somehow survived.
There really isn't much else to the short in terms of story, but it is indeed a visually captivating journey through what might've been a near-death experience. As the sailor is sent through the air, he's stripped of his clothes, and we see him flying through actual debris, as well as imaginary debris, all while reliving past events of his life. It is interesting how the directors intercalate live footage of nature, along with the fluid animation. The latter takes an almost choreographic, dance-like approach to the sailor's "journey", which ends up being quite beautiful.
The Halifax explosion ended up being one of the most significant disasters of the time, with almost two thousand deaths and almost 10,000 injured. Whole communities were destroyed, thousands of people were displaced, and communications and commerce were badly affected by the explosion. Mayers himself was treated by some as "delusional". But even though not much is known of Mayers after this, and the short takes considerable artistic license about his perceptions, I think it's safe to say that this must've been a life-changing experience.
Grade: 3.5
NIGHT RIDE
(2020, Tveiten)
https://i.imgur.com/cBNalCu.jpg
"Hey, tiny, just drive the tram!"
That's the demand that an abusive a$$hole screams at Ebba (Sigrid Kandal Husjord) as he's in the middle of assaulting a passenger. The demand is based on the aggressor's perceptions of who Ebba is and what her role is, which as far as he's concerned, are to drive the tram and not get in his "assaulting" business. That is part of the basis of this Academy Award nominated short film.
Night Ride follows Ebba, a curious passenger that doesn't want to wait outside in the cold before the tram leaves and unwittingly ends up at the wheel. But this night ride is not meant to be a smooth one as a rude passenger has an awkward exchange with Ariel (Ola Hoemsnes Sandum) that quickly escalates into something worse. Can Ebba do something to stop it? Is it up to her?
That is the premise of this short film, which seems to be an exploration of what others perceive to be our duties and what they actually are. Ebba is not supposed to be driving the tram, but people see her at the wheel and expect her to do so. In a similar line, Ebba shouldn't be the one stopping an assault, or at least not the only one, but then again, she might be.
With a 15 minute runtime, the short plays it a bit more on the lighter side, but not without diminishing the seriousness of the events. The incredibly earnest performance from Husjord adds to that as she manages to transmit both her unwillingness to be where she is, but also her resolve to do what needs to be done for being where she is; whether it is driving the tram or stopping an a$$hole from assaulting someone else.
Grade: 3.5
AN OSTRICH TOLD ME THE WORLD IS FAKE
AND I THINK I BELIEVE IT
(2022, Pendragon)
https://i.imgur.com/nsFFwqW.png
"Question everything, young man. The world is not quite what it seems."
Corporate life, and regular life overall, is not easy. I think it's safe to say that many of us, especially when reaching a certain age, have questioned "the purpose of it all"; what are we doing here? what's the point? What most of us probably haven't experienced is having an ostrich confront us with that thought... or who knows, maybe you have. Anyway, that's the main premise of this clever short film.
However, the short takes an interesting approach to it. Set almost in its entirety in a miniature office set for stop-motion animation, the film makes a constant effort to remind us that this is a film, that it is all fake (or "a sham", as the ostrich would say). The short focuses on Neil (Lachlan Pendragon), a salesperson at this office struggling with his dwindling toaster sales as well as a sudden existential dread; something that is heightened by the overnight visit of an ostrich.
This was certainly a clever twist on the "everything is fake" trope. The ways in which director, writer, and animator Pendragon transmits that feeling of "artificiality" are really inventive and well thought-out. By showing most of the action through the actively recording director's monitor or having the figures mouthpieces fall off unexpectedly, it all helps to put forth that theme of how everything is made up because it's a film, but also juxtaposing it with Neil's role within this artificial set.
All of this are just immensely creative ways to invite us to question our surroundings, but also to question those that incite that questioning and their purposes. Like the ostrich says, question *everything*, which includes questioning the ostrich itself. After all, the world is not quite what it seems.
Grade: 4
DOG DAY AFTERNOON
(1975, Lumet)
https://i.imgur.com/mvEC1VW.jpg
"Well, I'm talking to you. We're entertainment, right? What do you got for us?"
Set in a hot summer day in New York, Dog Day Afternoon follows Sonny (Al Pacino) as he tries to rob a bank along with his friend Sal (John Cazale). However, what is supposed to be a simple robbery goes all wrong, and ends up putting the spotlight on the two amateur robbers, as it all becomes a media spectacle.
We've all been there; glued to the TV and the news as some event unfolds, usually a tragic one. The adrenaline of everyone involved – the perpetrators doing the deed, the media recording it, and us watching it – makes everything feel tangible and close, but at the same time surreal and incredible.
That might be part of what prompts Sonny to ask the above question. He knows the spotlight is on them, and he feels like he has some sort of upper-hand. His frequent references to the Attica prison riot in 1971, where innocent people were killed by the police along with the guilty, hints that he's afraid his fate might be the same, so having cameras on him gives him a certain amount of security.
Despite the spectacle around them, the film doesn't treat these characters like "superstars", but rather makes an effort to showcase their humanity. Sonny and Sal are not robbers, that much is evident. They're humans, they're lovers, husbands, friends; just ordinary people that are driven to incredible events because of the circumstances around them.
By focusing on that humanity and those circumstances, which can be economic disparity or social differences (all things that Lumet smartly highlights in the opening credits scene which focuses on various New York settings and landmarks where regular people work and mingle), we can feel closer and identify with those characters. They're on TV, but at the same time tangible and close.
In the midst of its spectacle, Dog Day Afternoon manages to put a spotlight not in the event, but in the characters and the circumstances that drive them. It is a wildly effective mixture of drama, humor, social commentary, and thrills, with a clever script and some great performances. I mean, that's entertainment, right?
Grade: 4
AN OSTRICH TOLD ME THE WORLD IS FAKE
AND I THINK I BELIEVE IT
(2022, Pendragon)
Saw this last week, fun. I love high concept stuff and, if that wasn't enough, and on top of being pretty funny, it did a few technical things that made me genuinely wonder how they accomplished them. Great stuff.
Saw this last week, fun. I love high concept stuff and, if that wasn't enough, and on top of being pretty funny, it did a few technical things that made me genuinely wonder how they accomplished them. Great stuff.
Yeah, I also suppose that people with actual filming experience will get a kick out of it.
ICE MERCHANTS
(2022, Gonzalez)
https://i.imgur.com/IwQugID.jpg
"A family drama about loss and family connection."
That is how filmmaker João Gonzalez described his short film for a New Yorker interview. At 14 minutes, this silent short film certainly has to let the images and the music carry the burden of those themes, but it does so pretty well.
Set in a steep cliff where a house is perched, Ice Merchants follows a father-and-son duo as they continuously go through their routine of picking ice, jumping down, selling ice, going back up. It's all shown beautifully through the minimalist animation of Gonzalez.
But beyond the rigors of that routine, there are indeed some moments where the images show you there was a loss, and consequently, how that ever-present connection between the family can keep us alive, and help us to carry on. Ice Merchants might feel like a simple story, but it does have a lot of heart.
Grade: 3.5
MY YEAR OF DICKS
(2022, Gunnarsdóttir)
https://i.imgur.com/UWIirsF.jpg
"Pamela, let me tell you, women don't actually like having sex. They like the kissing beforehand, and the hugging and the cuddling after. But the actual... penetration is quite unpleasant for a woman."
Puberty and adolescence can be a stressful and confusing time for any teenager. Everything is out of control; the body, hormones, emotions, feelings. Not to mention the pressures of friends and society, paired with the moral inhibitions about love and sex. Our body wants certain things, our peers say we should do certain things, but our parents and society tells us we shouldn't, which makes this acclaimed short an interesting snapshot of one teenage girl's journey.
My Year of Dicks is a semi-autobiographical short written by Pamela Ribon, based on her experiences as a teenager. Directed by Sara Gunnarsdóttir, it is separated in five chapters chronicling a year in the life of Pam (Brie Tilton), as she is determined to lose her virginity. Each chapter follows a different attempt from Pam to "succeed", while featuring different tones and animation styles, culminating with her father giving her the "sex talk" (see an excerpt above).
There have been countless of films about male teenagers determined to lose their virginity, but not nearly as much about female teenagers in the same situation. From that angle, it is refreshing to see Ribon's experiences and perspective brought to life. The story, though, doesn't stray that far from the typical tropes of the genre, and you can probably guess where things will go in the end, but that doesn't make the journey less endearing.
In addition, Gunnarsdótir's decision to distinguish every chapter with a specific tone and animation style makes things feel more alive. The main animation style, which I think is roto-scoping, can be a bit crude but it adds a certain level of unpolishness that I think fits the overall theme. After all, that's how love and sex are usually at first, unpolished and not necessarily as "perfect" as we would expect, but still unique and worth experiencing and remembering.
Grade: 3.5
Mr Minio
03-28-23, 11:17 AM
MY YEAR OF DICKS I hated this film, but I have a theory that "dicks" means literal penises (ones she hadn't got for a long time, though wanted to) but also (and predominantly) the men she wanted to lose virginity with who turned out to be just that in her mind: dicks. Just imagine a guy directing the movie: "My Year of Cants". And of course, there's that one guy who rejected her advances in the park (I cheered!) but eventually gave in to her (I booed!). Mandatory rape/molestation part, mandatory you're on your period so I lost my boner, and a mandatory (literal!) patriarch saying "Women don't enjoy sex". Jesus Christ.
I mean, The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse wasn't good either, and the inspirational quotes pilfered straight from a self-help book sure irked me. But at least it looked good and the characters were adorable. The Boy, The Mole... was substantially more valuable than My Year of Dicks in nearly every way.
Puberty and adolescence can be a stressful and confusing time for any teenager. Everything is out of control; the body, hormones, emotions, feelings. Not to mention the pressures of friends and society, paired with the moral inhibitions about love and sex. Our body wants certain things, our peers say we should do certain things, but our parents and society tells us we shouldn't, which makes this acclaimed short an interesting snapshot of one teenage girl's journey. Interesting. Now that I think of it, I never really went through that adolescent part. I was a child and then, BAM! I became an adult. I never had that infamous rebellious phase either. I never wanted to do certain things, and I always frowned upon those who did. I was always calm and composed. I never did anything that was against my beliefs or moral system and I never really wanted to.
So, I never understood movies like My Year of Dicks. I never understood any of the teen comedies. I did understand, say, Japanese teen dramas. But never American teen comedies. It's such an abstract concept to me, to desperately want to lose your virginity. With whoever is first. But just to lose it, as if it was a rite of passage that gives you superpowers.
There have been countless of films about male teenagers determined to lose their virginity Have there? Probably those teen comedies I avoid like fire. Because I sure can't remember anything like that at the moment. Oh, there's the American Pie series. One of the worst series in the world, I guess.
but not nearly as much about female teenagers in the same situation Here I can at least say Lady Bird - another sorry excuse for a movie.
After all, that's how love and sex are usually at first, unpolished and not necessarily as "perfect" as we would expect, but still unique and worth experiencing and remembering. I think it's not just because some people's expectations are too high. But also because some people unknowingly do things that make their initial relationships unpolished, and ultimately fail. Like, I don't know, getting involved with a dick, or something.
I hated this film, but I have a theory that "dicks" means literal penises (ones she hadn't got for a long time, though wanted to) but also (and predominantly) the men she wanted to lose virginity with who turned out to be just that in her mind: dicks. Just imagine a guy directing the movie: "My Year of Cants". And of course, there's that one guy who rejected her advances in the park (I cheered!) but eventually gave in to her (I booed!). Mandatory rape/molestation part, mandatory you're on your period so I lost my boner, and a mandatory (literal!) patriarch saying "Women don't enjoy sex". Jesus Christ.
I mean, The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse wasn't good either, and the inspirational quotes pilfered straight from a self-help book sure irked me. But at least it looked good and the characters were adorable. The Boy, The Mole... was substantially more valuable than My Year of Dicks in nearly every way.
The title is obviously a wordplay on literal dicks and metaphorical "dicks", like you said. Since you brought it up, The Boy, the Mole.. is the only Oscar-nominated animated short from last year I haven't gotten to, and it's the one who won. Of the others I've seen, I enjoyed The Ostrich... more, but I had no issues with this one.
Interesting. Now that I think of it, I never really went through that adolescent part. I was a child and then, BAM! I became an adult. I never had that infamous rebellious phase either. I never wanted to do certain things, and I always frowned upon those who did. I was always calm and composed. I never did anything that was against my beliefs or moral system and I never really wanted to.
So, I never understood movies like My Year of Dicks. I never understood any of the teen comedies. I did understand, say, Japanese teen dramas. But never American teen comedies. It's such an abstract concept to me, to desperately want to lose your virginity. With whoever is first. But just to lose it, as if it was a rite of passage that gives you superpowers.
Everybody has different experiences and perspectives, and this short certainly isn't the first time that I hear/read of experiences like this. My perspective from a Christian-raised male from Puerto Rico won't necessarily equate to the ones from Ribon or Gunnarsdóttir, but I can appreciate them sharing their views.
Have there? Probably those teen comedies I avoid like fire. Because I sure can't remember anything like that at the moment. Oh, there's the American Pie series. One of the worst series in the world, I guess.
Here I can at least say Lady Bird - another sorry excuse for a movie.
Aside of American Pie, some of the ones that come to mind that are about "losing virginity" or touch on that on a significant "subplot" level are...
Porky's
Can't Hardly Wait
Sixteen Candles
Risky Business
Fast Times at Ridgemont High
Out of those, the one I can certainly take away as genuinely good is probably Fast Times. The other ones I either think they're dumb fun, haven't seen in a very long time, or don't like that much.
I think it's not just because some people's expectations are too high. But also because some people unknowingly do things that make their initial relationships unpolished, and ultimately fail. Like, I don't know, getting involved with a dick, or something.
I think both things go hand-in-hand. Because of all those reasons I brought up about peer pressure or sheer hormonal drive, a lot of teens jump into sexual encounters without the right maturity, caution, expectations, etc. which result in not so pleasant experiences. Then again, there is that unnecessary pressure of that "first time" being "special" when at the end of the day, it really shouldn't matter, but well.
VALLEY OF THE DOLLS
(1967, Robson)
https://i.imgur.com/skGB0Kr.jpg
"Honey, listen, it's a rotten business."
"I know. But I love it!"
That's the entertainment business they're talking about in the above quote. A business that one can say is equally plagued by the "highs" of success and the glory of fame, as well as the bitterness, the jealousy, the resentment, the backstabbings, and the overall pressures of keeping a certain status. Those are waters that a lot of wannabe artists crave, but not everybody can navigate, which serves as the backdrop of these 1960s titillating drama.
Valley of the Dolls follows three young women that find themselves dipping their toes in these waters and then end up being washed away by it. Most of the plot follows Anne Welles (Barbara Parkins), a recent graduate that starts as a secretary at a theatrical agency but ends up unwittingly sucked deeper into the business. She is joined by Neely O'Hara (Patty Duke), a rising star in Broadway, and Jennifer North (Sharon Tate), a chorus girl with low self-esteem.
The film chronicles the rise and fall of the three friends as they struggle with newfound fame, failing relationships, and addiction to alcohol and barbiturates (i.e. the titular "dolls") in the midst of this "rotten business". Generally speaking, I feel like there is a strong story here about the burdens and pressures of fame. Unfortunately, it is buried under mediocre craftmanship and bad acting.
The film has some serious issues with its pacing, and the way the events unfold. Maybe it's the editing or the direction, or a mixture of both, but there is an unnevenness in how the film moves from one sequence to the other. Certain relationships, interactions, and plot developments feel like coming out of nowhere, as if there was a scene or two missing in between.
Some of these plot developments either "half work" or should work, but it's all so shoddily assembled that it ends up hindering the overall effect. Add to that the poor performances and the excessive melodrama, and you end up with all the ingredients for a disaster... and still, just like the "rotten business" the characters are sucked into, there is something captivating about it. Not enough for me to "love it", but enough to not turn it off.
Grade: 2
THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN
(2022, McDonagh)
https://i.imgur.com/x6mmICb.png
“We’ll keep aimlessly chatting, and me life will keep dwindling, and in 12 years I’ll die with nothin’ to show for it, bar the chats I’ve had with a limited man. Is that it?”
What are friends for? That's a question that's often asked rhetorically when acknowledging something done among friends. But seriously, what are friends for? Are they people you feel comfortable with and want to hang out with, people to aimlessly chat with, or is there a deeper value to be attributed to friendship; something you feel the need to get something from?
The Banshees of Inisherin seems to ask that question as it follows longtime friends Colm (Brendan Gleeson) and Padraic (Colin Farrell) reach a crossroad in their relationship. Colm seems to be going through an existential crisis that makes him see little value in his relationship with Padraic, especially as he approaches a certain age, whereas Padraic just can't believe his old mate doesn't wanna hang out with him anymore.
The thing is that Colm seems to be more interested in the future, his "legacy" as a musician, rather than his friendship with Padraic. McDonagh uses this conundrum to explore what is our place and purpose in the world – to create and leave "something" behind – or just to be nice to people, but also what it means to be a friend in the face of despair, maturity, growth, and even death.
Are friendships supposed to be this "transactional" relationship where you're supposed to "get something" out of the other? Are we meant to be friends with everybody forever and ever, regardless of how much we change and grow, or is Colm behaving like a 12-year old? It's interesting how, upon Colm's rejection, Padraic latches onto Dominic (Barry Keoghan), the friendly but dim-witted son of the local policeman, as if establishing a new "friend hierarchy" with him at the top.
But that dilemma is just the beginning. McDonagh ends up taking the story into really unexpected ways, anchored by four amazing performances in Gleeson, Farrell, Keoghan, and Kerry Condon as Padraic's sister, perhaps the most level-headed resident of Inisherin. They are all blessed with a script that's smart, clever, funny, witty, deep, and evoking equal doses of despair and hope, in an amazing mixture of tragedy and comedy.
Grade: 4.5
EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE
(2022, Daniels)
https://i.imgur.com/bA1k2zg.jpg
"Not a single moment will go by without every other universe screaming for your attention. Never fully there. Just a lifetime of fractured moments, contradictions, and confusion. With only a few specks of time where anything actually makes any sense."
That's how one of the main characters of Everything Everywhere All at Once (or rather her "evil" counterpart) describes this "tortured" multiverse reality they're living, but it could also be used to describe the plot of the film. I mean, a Chinese-American immigrant (Michelle Yeoh) is being audited by the IRS when she discovers her connection with multiple universes, including one where people have hot-dog fingers; a connection she has to use to save these universes from being destroyed by her alternate father and daughter, and a floating bagel. Whoosh!
Really, it's not that its complex, just that it is too many silly and absurd things thrown at once. The overload from the story and the fights and the frenetic rhythm of the film, all screaming for your attention might not be for everyone. Fractured moments, contradictions, and confusion, one might say; with only a few specks of time where anything actually makes any sense, and I'm not necessarily saying it in a bad way. I discovered this film was written and directed by the same guys that did Swiss Army Man shortly after watching it, and I went like "yeah, it figures".
So if you're into fast-paced absurdism, then this might be for you. But as far as I'm concerned, what kept this film afloat was the emotional anchor provided by the characters, especially Ke Huy Quan and Stephanie Hsu, who play Yeoh's husband and daughter respectively. KHQ gives an incredibly endearing and charismatic performance, but Hsu really digs deep into the heart and emotion of this "fractured" character to which nothing actually makes any sense. As fun as Jamie Lee Curtis was as a relentless IRS agent, I see no universe in which her performance was better than Hsu's.
I commend the Daniels for staying true to their quirky ideas, but to be honest, I think that the emotional weight of the film was sometimes drowned by all the things that they throw at the audience screaming for our attention. Now that they won every single Oscar, I suppose they'll swing even harder, but I think a bit of restraint wouldn't have been a bad thing here. Even though I was never fully there, I cherished those specks of time where something, anything, made any sense for me.
Grade: 3.5
SHIP OF FOOLS
(1965, Kramer)
https://i.imgur.com/WFfaClD.jpg
"Are you happy?"
"Who is happy?"
That's the exchange between two characters during a climatic conversation in this film. It goes to the core of every passenger, each of which is coping with different shades and levels of unhappiness. And yet, most of them pretend things are not what they seem as they try to "avoid being fools". Knowing where the ship, and their lives, are headed, we know things aren't getting any easier.
Set in 1933, Ship of Fools follows a group of passengers on a ship headed to pre-World War II Germany. The passengers include a "flirty" divorced woman, a young couple that can't stop fighting and making up, a disgraced former baseball player, an opiate addict, a troupe of flamenco musicians and dancers, a dwarf, Nazi sympathizers, Jewish people, and hundreds of poor Spanish workers sent back to their country. Through their interactions, the film addresses themes like classism, racism, xenophobia, regrets, love, infatuation, happiness, and the lack of it.
The film boasts an impressive ensemble cast that includes Vivien Leigh, Oskar Werner, Simone Signoret, Lee Marvin, José Ferrer, and George Segal, among many others. Most of the performances are solid, with Werner probably being my favorite. His role as the ship's medical officer, Dr. Schumann, is the closest that comes to a protagonist and his complex relationship with La Condesa (Signoret) provides a lot of the emotional baggage of the film.
Ferrer also seems to be having a lot of fun with his performance as a loud anti-Semite while Marvin, although not as effective, still has a particularly solid scene as he drunkenly reminisces on his career. Michael Dunn also has an excellent performance as Glocken, the dwarf that seems to be on the sidelines most of the time, observing everything and even breaking the fourth wall to comment on what he sees in this "ship of fools".
Like it often happens with ensemble films, the attempt to juggle so many characters results in some of the subplots falling by the wayside. For example, even though Leigh is pretty good, her subplot was one that I didn't particularly care about. The film also relies often in the use of dramatic irony, which sometimes ends up feeling like forced attempts of the film elbowing us and going like "get it?".
Despite those few flaws, I still find this film to be quite effective. Even though it's not as subtle as one would want, I appreciated how it showed the many ways that these passengers try to find happiness; whether it is in sex or love, a dance or a drink, a seat at the table or a moment alone, or maybe even a spray from a water hose in a hot day. They might not end up finding happiness, but they'll be happy... at least for a moment.
Grade: 4
SpelingError
04-05-23, 12:05 AM
EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE
(2022, Daniels)
https://i.imgur.com/bA1k2zg.jpg
That's how one of the main characters of Everything Everywhere All at Once (or rather her "evil" counterpart) describes this "tortured" multiverse reality they're living, but it could also be used to describe the plot of the film. I mean, a Chinese-American immigrant (Michelle Yeoh) is being audited by the IRS when she discovers her connection with multiple universes, including one where people have hot-dog fingers; a connection she has to use to save these universes from being destroyed by her alternate father and daughter, and a floating bagel. Whoosh!
Really, it's not that its complex, just that it is too many silly and absurd things thrown at once. The overload from the story and the fights and the frenetic rhythm of the film, all screaming for your attention might not be for everyone. Fractured moments, contradictions, and confusion, one might say; with only a few specks of time where anything actually makes any sense, and I'm not necessarily saying it in a bad way. I discovered this film was written and directed by the same guys that did Swiss Army Man shortly after watching it, and I went like "yeah, it figures".
So if you're into fast-paced absurdism, then this might be for you. But as far as I'm concerned, what kept this film afloat was the emotional anchor provided by the characters, especially Ke Huy Quan and Stephanie Hsu, who play Yeoh's husband and daughter respectively. KHQ gives an incredibly endearing and charismatic performance, but Hsu really digs deep into the heart and emotion of this "fractured" character to which nothing actually makes any sense. As fun as Jamie Lee Curtis was as a relentless IRS agent, I see no universe in which her performance was better than Hsu's.
I commend the Daniels for staying true to their quirky ideas, but to be honest, I think that the emotional weight of the film was sometimes drowned by all the things that they throw at the audience screaming for our attention. Now that they won every single Oscar, I suppose they'll swing even harder, but I think a bit of restraint wouldn't have been a bad thing here. Even though I was never fully there, I cherished those specks of time where something, anything, made any sense for me.
Grade: 3.5
That was largely my impression as well, and I think I might've given the film too high of a rating. I understand why many people really like it, but I was just too worn down throughout so much of it to feel the emotional resonance much.
TIMECRIMES
(2007, Vigalondo)
A film with the word "Time" in its title
https://i.imgur.com/ogCrIE3.jpg
"No matter what you hear, don't come out. Don't interfere."
Some SPOILERS might follow
Time travel films vary in style, purpose, and quality. From the wacky shenanigans of Back to the Future to the horror-like thrills of The Terminator. However, one thing is always constant in them: Don't interfere, because the slightest meddling in past events can have tragic or maybe even catastrophic consequences.
Timecrimes takes that premise and brings it down into more personal stakes. The film follows Héctor (Karra Elejalde), a man who unknowingly walks into a time machine that takes him an hour into the past. This puts him in a time loop where he is attacked by a masked man, forcing him to protect his wife from him or others.
It is impossible to talk about this film without spoiling it in some way, so I won't try. I appreciate how economical the film is in how it handles its premise. With a low budget, and a cast of only four people, the script is clever enough to keep the focus, not necessarily in the sci-fi/time travel aspect, but rather in the choices this man makes as he explores this new reality. Like I said above, the stakes are not "world destruction", but rather to protect his wife at all costs.
There are some aspects of the story that might be predictable, especially if you've seen a film like Triangle, with which it has a lot of parallels. However, the twists and turns keep things interesting. I'm a sucker for time travel films, so I always enjoy how they spin their paradoxes in a way that can still surprise me to some extent. Plus, I really appreciated how the film behaves more like a slasher instead of a sci-fi film.
There is a bit of a stretch in how the main character goes from a bumbling, middle aged man that doesn't realize the consequences of his actions into a more ruthless sociopath that doesn't care about them. However, the positives in the film outweigh the logistical issues it might have. Overall, it's a fun ride, so I choose not to interfere with it.
Grade: 3.5
THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI
(2017, McDonagh)
A film with the the number 3 (Three, Third, etc.) in its title
https://i.imgur.com/cLrOqvq.jpg
"There are just some cases, where you never catch a break. Then 5 years down the line, some guy hears some other guy braggin' about it in a barroom or a jail cell. The whole thing is wrapped up through sheer stupidity."
Tragedy can take many forms and shapes. It can come in the form of an unexpected illness or the murder of a loved one. The above is the faint hope that Sheriff Willoughby (Woody Harrelson) can give Mildred Hayes (Frances McDormand) after the murder of her daughter has been unsolved for months. But Mildred is not one to wait 5 years for some random barroom gossip or someone's stupidity to wrap things up.
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri follows the efforts of Mildred to spark Willoughby and the local police into action in order to bring justice, but also for her to have some sort of closure. Her strategy is to rent three billboards on an isolated road in town asking the sheriff for results. Unfortunately, this puts her at odds not only with many supporters of the sheriff, but especially with Dixon (Sam Rockwell), a loyal but racist deputy that's determined to stop Mildred.
This was the second McDonagh film I saw in the month. It's interesting to see the parallels in terms of tone as the writer and director skillfully juggles both tragedy and comedy. It kinda reminds me of Bong Joon-ho, who does so in the middle of serious dramatic films about murder, serial killers, or classism. McDonagh's script is clever enough to weave in and out of these tragic situations with effective humor, but without losing the dramatic weight of what has happened or what will happen.
I do think he goes a bit overboard from time to time, and some subplots are underserved, but overall, the character of Mildred keeps things grounded pretty well. McDormand adds yet another stellar performance to her resume, but it is Rockwell who steals the show with his performance as a loud-mouthed, alcoholic, racist, and abusive a$$hole. It is impressive how, despite boasting the traits of a despicable man, you end up caring for him.
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is one of those films that dares to take the story into some unexpected places. Regardless of how some of these detours work or not, I respect McDonagh's swings. Much like Mildred's strategy, it's still worth trying; even if it doesn't work, even if it ends up enraging others, even if it refuses to wrap things up as neatly as you would expect.
Grade: 4
OKJA
(2017, Bong)
A film from South Korea
https://i.imgur.com/Cs7vsCb.jpg
"Shoulder blade! Loin! Spare rib! Hock! Got it? This is what will happen to her. This is Okja's fate!"
There is a special bond formed between a child and their pet. It is usually one of mutual love, care, and protection. Unfortunately, it's not a bond that everybody understands or values, and that is sometimes dismissed without realizing the consequences. That is some of the backdrop of Bong Joon-ho's US/Korean co-production, Okja.
The film follows the titular "super-pig", one of many that was genetically modified and bred with one goal in mind: to become shoulder blade, loin, spare rib, hock! That is Okja's fate, according to Lucy Mirando (Tilda Swinton) and the people at Mirando Corporation. But Mija (Ahn Seo-hyun), the young girl that has been taking care of Okja for ten years, sees beyond the superficial purpose of her "super-pig".
The thing is that Mija doesn't know about Okja's "fate". She's under the impression that the pig belongs to them, so when a Mirando team comes to their house to take Okja, she ain't having none of that. Determined to rescue her pig, Mija goes from Seoul to New York. In her journey, she is helped by members of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) led by Jay (Paul Dano), who seemed to have their own goals in mind regarding Okja.
Like most of Bong's films, Okja walks a fine line between drama and humor. Most of the characters are larger-than-life caricatures, sometimes in both ends of the spectrum. From the emotionally detached corporate executives to the emotionally invested environmentalists. Most of these, work pretty well within the film. However, I think Jake Gyllenhaal's performance as a wacky zoologist and TV host was a bit too far. It's maybe the only character that felt out of place for me.
On the other hand, Ahn Seo-hyun's performance as Mija is a true delight. She succeeds in transmitting the innocence and charm of a child, but also Mija's steadfast determination to do whatever she needs to rescue Okja. I would've loved to see a bit more done with the relationship with her grandfather (Byun Hee-bong). It seems to me that there was a bit more there than what we ended up with, and considering the way their paths clashed, I would've liked to see something more out of it.
In addition to the performances, Bong's direction and Darius Khondji's cinematography are fantastic. The film's criticism of the meat industry is nothing but subtle, which might rub some people the wrong way, but given the overall film's tone, I think it is warranted and ultimately effective. I'm as far from a vegetarian as anyone could be, but I think there's something for all of us to think and ponder about whenever we're having shoulder blade, loin, spare rib, hock.
Grade: 4
DO THE RIGHT THING
(1989, Lee)
A film from Spike Lee
https://i.imgur.com/8yi1nlU.jpg
"Let me tell you the story of Right Hand, Left Hand. It's a tale of good and evil. Hate: it was with this hand that Cain iced his brother. Love: these five fingers, they go straight to the soul of man. The right hand: the hand of love. The story of life is this: static. One hand is always fighting the other hand, and the left hand is kicking much ass."
Race relations in the United States (and probably elsewhere) have always been... complicated, to say the least. From the British and the Native Americans, to the white man/black man struggles, and everything in between. With more than 200 years of established, there isn't a time in American history that is not defined in some way by racial tension. The idea of a "melting pot" where people from different cultures can come and meld together to become stronger is constantly put to the test.
Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing gives us a microcosm of that in one little street. Set during a hot summer day in the Bed-Stuy neighborhood of Brooklyn, the film is mostly focused on the interactions of Mookie (Lee), a pizza delivery boy, with the residents of this street personifying that microcosm. We have the Italian-owned pizzeria and the Korean-owned convenience store anchored in a predominantly black neighborhood, with some Puerto Ricans sprinkled around.
This is the second time I see this film, with the first time being probably more than 20-25 years ago. Needless to say, my appreciation and perception of the film now was way deeper than it was back then, when I was 17 or 18 years old. It is amazing the way that Lee challenges the audience through a carefully crafted script that is not designed for us to root for anyone, but rather to show us the way things are, and maybe make us wonder what can we do for things to change.
To fully analyze this film and what it means, you can't just look at the main events that occur, but also at those that preceded it. There are catalysts and consequences to everything, and the way the film presents us "big picture" themes of cultural appropriation, displacement, gentrification, and racial tensions through seemingly "little" events in one day is masterful. It is the kind of film that the more I think about, the more things I find out that enrage me, but also make me fall in love with it more.
The main thesis of the film is presented through the above quote from Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn), a colorful character that carries around a loud boom-box and wears two brass knuckles with the words "LOVE" and "HATE". His little monologue highlights the duality that is in all of us, which we see all through the film, most notably in the constant references to Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X as representatives of African-Americans, but also in Mookie and his boss, Sal (Danny Aiello). There is "love" and "hate" in all of us, and sometimes they get mixed up with each other.
The last act features a murder at the hands of the police, and a business burned down in the middle of a riot, and then another day begins. The cycle repeats. The film then closes with two contrasting quotes from King and Malcolm X, both of which show their differing ideologies: "Love" and "Hate". The fact that both were assassinated within three years of each other during the 1960s, at the height of the Civil Rights movement, is a sad reminder of the "options" that people have to demand equality.
These quotes are followed by a dedication to a handful of victims of racial violence during the 1980s. 30 years later, we're still seeing people dying at the hands of the police, businesses burned down in the middle of riots, and the cycle keeps repeating itself. And yet, another day begins, with another chance for every one of us to "do the right thing". That's it.
Grade: 4.5
Timecrimes is excellent, as is Triangle, which you also mentioned. Do the Right Thing is a classic.
Timecrimes is excellent, as is Triangle, which you also mentioned. Do the Right Thing is a classic.
I give a slight edge to Triangle, but maybe that's because I saw it first? But anyway, yeah. Two really cool films.
IKIRU
(1952, Kurosawa)
A film from Akira Kurosawa
https://i.imgur.com/L9bab2z.jpg
"We only realize how beautiful life is when we face death. And even then, few of us realize it. The worst among us know nothing of life until they die."
There is a tragic irony in me writing about movies while sitting on my desk at a job I don't particularly enjoy. For numerous reasons, we often end up trapped in dead-end jobs or thankless careers; sometimes reasons we cannot or won't change, so we just wait as time to pass by, so we can go home, sleep, and wake up to do the same again. Sometimes it takes bravado to change things around, and sometimes it takes a terminal illness for us to realize how much time we've wasted in the wrong things.
Ikiru follows Kanji Watanabe (Takashi Shimura), a man that is stuck in that cycle. After 30 years working a monotonous, bureaucratic job, he gets diagnosed with cancer, which prompts him to start making some changes in his life. He goes from a night of drinking with a novelist he meets at a bar, to spending whole days with a former co-worker half his age because he says he's "jealous" of her energy.
There is a very strong and ever-present critique of bureaucratic systems throughout the film. It is shown as something that stifles the efforts of the government to ultimately serve the public, as well as stifling those like Watanabe that work under that system. But the film is ultimately about his quest for purpose in the last stage of his life. It is a reminder that we can still make a difference regardless of how late we think it might be.
This is the first non-period film from Kurosawa that I see and you can notice a bit of a shift to a more "personal" approach to his direction, especially when compared to epics like Ran or Seven Samurai. There are a lot of close-ups, especially of Watanabe's face, where you can literally see his despair and anguish as he tries to figure out what to do with what's left of his life. His exchanges with the novelist (Yūnosuke Itō) and the female co-worker (Miki Odagiri) are two effective ways in which the film anchors the first two acts of the film.
However, there is a storytelling device used in the last act that I didn't find as effective. I felt it muddled the overall impact, but not by much. Overall, the film is a poignant and heart-warming look at life and the choices we can still make while there's still time. There are two instances when Watanabe sings a song called "Gondola no Uta", which are probably the emotional peaks of the film. A song whose lyrics reminds us that "life is brief" and that we should do the things we want, "for there is no such thing as tomorrow, after all". Maybe I should learn from that.
Grade: 4
Finally, here's my summary for MARCH 2023:
A film from South Korea (March 1st Movement): Okja (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381697-okja.html)
A film with the number 3 (Three, Third, etc.) in its title: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381645-three_billboards_outside_ebbing_missouri.html)
A film from Akira Kurosawa (born March 23): Ikiru (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382008-ikiru.html)
A film from Spike Lee (born March 20): Do the Right Thing (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381708-do_the_right_thing.html)
A film with the word "Time" in its title (Daylight Savings Time, March 12): Timecrimes (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381578-timecrimes.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/pHlRr2MfjK77VIIAO7p0R4jhsJI.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/pZRhqJj0DBy4ghB7g6pU7MGHsWJ.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/dgNTS4EQDDVfkzJI5msKuHu2Ei3.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/63rmSDPahrH7C1gEFYzRuIBAN9W.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/svQmmEyXbMMPKGvj2PYxi72tXwY.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
30th Hall of Fame: Dog Day Afternoon (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2379254-dog_day_afternoon.html), Valley of the Dolls (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2380447-valley_of_the_dolls.html), Ship of Fools (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381441-ship_of_fools.html)
Oscar-nominated shorts: The Flying Sailor (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2379073-the_flying_sailor.html), Night Ride (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2379082-night_ride.html), An Ostrich Told Me the World Is Fake and I Think I Believe It (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2379218-an_ostrich_told_me_the_world_is_fake_and_i_think_i_believe_it.html), Ice Merchants (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2379532-ice_merchants.html), My Year of Dicks (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2380199-my_year_of_dicks.html)
Best Picture nominees: The Banshees of Inisherin (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381077-the_banshees_of_inisherin.html), Everything Everywhere All at Once (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2381397-everything_everywhere_all_at_once.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/mavrhr0ig2aCRR8d48yaxtD5aMQ.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/6UqOP9FsGKoWOnAZWgx21H5ilef.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gIUmTvAYRSbQyEMV0dJtNWq62b5.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/xWkv9WOT8EFvzN7pdyaOIVAUVuZ.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/v8SQQt7vlyvEwimhUT273HeBD8v.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/a0xrTLwvosW81fuFhdWYdu35GJ0.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/7FahiLihDd3zMn6bXcH3zyDZZm.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/pJDxugqyIjvwrhQdnYuCeMzEpAu.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/4yFG6cSPaCaPhyJ1vtGOtMD1lgh.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/w3LxiVYdWWRvEVdn5RYq6jIqkb1.jpg
Not counting rewatches, I think my favorites were The Banshees of Inisherin and Ikiru. Beyond that, there were a lot of really good ones like Okja, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, and Ship of Fools.
My least favorite was probably Valley of the Dolls, but I have to admit there's something alluring about it :laugh:
SCREAM
(2022, Bettinelli-Olpin & Gillett)
https://i.imgur.com/R198drg.jpg
"You can't just do a straight sequel, either. You need to build something new. But not too new or the Internet goes bug-f-ucking-nuts."
That is part of the explanation that a character gives when explaining the course of the Scre- I mean, Stab franchise, as they try to understand why another Ghostface is stalking them 25 years after the first Woodsboro murders. But of course, it's all part of the constant wink, wink, nudge, nudge to the audience that this film is pulling, as this new, umm, sequel in the Scream franchise unfolds.
This time, we're following estranged sisters: Tara and Sam (Jenna Ortega and Melissa Barrera). When Tara is attacked by Ghostface and left in the hospital, Sam returns to Woodsboro with her boyfriend Richie (Jack Quaid) where she reunites with Tara, and meets her circle of friends, most of which will probably die soon. Of course, as is the case with the franchise, one (or two?) of them are likely the ones doing the murdering. But who?
Ever since the first Scream was released in 1996, the franchise has become known for its notable meta-commentary on the state of the horror genre. Unfortunately, as more sequels came around, the franchise devolved into some of the same trends and problems it was criticizing in the first place. Scream 4 was a bit of fresh air as it managed to subvert some of the expectations about the story, while still being fun.
Now, 11 years after the last installment, the franchise is trying exactly what one of Tara's friends, Mindy (Jasmin Savoy Brown) is saying in the above quote. Scream (this Scream, not the original) is "something new, but not too new". It has a new creative team behind, and is headed by "new main characters, yes, but supported by, and related to, legacy characters. Not quite a reboot, not quite a sequel."
Aside from the above cast, the film sees the return of Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, and David Arquette, as they are determined to stop this trend of Ghostface murders. The integration of the "new main characters" and the "legacy characters" works for the most part. Campbell looks more comfortable than ever in the role, while allowing Ortega and Barrera the space to shine. Arquette was also the best I've seen him in the whole franchise.
But like I said above, the beauty of the franchise is in two things: its clever meta-commentary and how well it manages to handle the "whodunit" aspect. I felt it succeeded for the most part in both. Although the commentary on sequels/prequels/reboots and the rise of so-called "elevated horror" was sometimes a bit too "in your face", I still felt it was funny and witty. Meanwhile, the intrigue about who the killer (or killers?) is was well executed. I could say there's some predictability to it, but that's the thing with these films; we're always looking and guessing, so it's hard not to put our money and guesses on the right one(s).
Unfortunately, the pace was a bit off at times. There were some lulls between solid moments that didn't work as well, and there's a bit of a stretch in believability in how these events are connected to the original films. Regardless of that, I think my experience was positive, the characters were mostly likabel, the thrills were there, the kills were good, so I'm open to see where this new team takes the franchise, instead of going "bug-f-ucking nuts".
Grade: 3.5
AVATAR
(2005, Quílez)
https://i.imgur.com/c5CsPNJ.png
"Every time you hold out longer."
Traditional wedding vows usually include the promise from both parts to love and be with the other "for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part." This sounds so charming and moving during the wedding, but not so much when the actual "worse" comes around five, ten, twenty years down the road; and sometimes one or both parts can't hold out any longer.
Avatar is a short film from Spanish filmmaker Lluis Quilez that presents us a couple in that situation. It follows a wheelchair-bound husband (Sebastián Haro) as he is subjected to a tense bath from his wife (Rosana Pastor). From the get-go, you can see there's distance between the two, and this is proven as the short progresses. Evidently, the "worse" and the "sickness" came, and there was no room to love and cherish.
This short film was recommended by filmmaker Tim Egan, when I interviewed him earlier this year. He cited it as an inspiration for him while calling it both beautiful and heart-breaking. I suppose that the same can be said about marriage. Anybody that has been married long enough knows that the time you spend together with this other person is bound to have both beautiful and heart-breaking moments, so it's just a thing to try to navigate those moments together.
From a technical standpoint, the short is great. Direction, cinematography, editing, everything is in the right place. But what makes it for me is the performances from Haro and Pastor, both of which make so much with just facial expressions and looks. There's hardly any dialogue and yet you get all you need to know from their body language, and it's impressive.
There is a tragic beauty in how Quílez slowly unfolds what's happening. Like with any family and personal situation, there are a hundred things we don't know about others, and when it hits you towards the end, you can't help but feel sorry for them. For better, for richer, and in health is easy; for worse, for poorer, and in sickness might require us to hold out longer for things to change... or just to let go.
Grade: 4
NEXT FLOOR
(2008, Villeneuve)
https://i.imgur.com/gw0YBv2.png
"Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
That was God's command to mankind on the sixth day, at least according to the Bible. Putting men and women in a position of power over everything else, asking them to "subdue" the earth, and "rule" over every "living creature". Some of that might or might not be at the core of this short from Denis Villeneuve.
Next Floor follows a group of guests being offered an opulent banquet of various foods: from beef, sausages, chicken, fish and oysters, to antelope or rhinoceros. All being constantly carted into the table as the guests chow down relentlessly and voraciously. The contrast between the elegance of the setting and the grotesque of the menu, as well as their behavior, is evident.
The short film is fairly enigmatic and surreal, as we see the crowded table, guests and all, plummet down onto the "next floor". Something that doesn't seem to faze the guests that much. Even though it keeps on happening, they just keep on eating and eating, as the caravan of waiters follow them down the stairs.
It isn't that hard to find meaning in it. It can be a critique of the senseless slaughter of animals, it can be a metaphor for capitalism and the ruthless use of power by those in position, or it can be a reference to the ironies of the Bible and religion as "careless men" are asked to "rule" over every "living creature".
As I saw it, I got strong echoes of 2019's The Platform, which I think is more blunt in its symbolism. Regardless of what Villeneuve had in mind or the meaning different people might get from it, it's a gorgeously shot short film and it nonetheless offers something for us to chew on.
Grade: 3
FLOOR 9.5
(2017, Meakins)
https://i.imgur.com/hKaZF2q.png
"Please... you gotta turn around."
Floor 9.5 is a 2-minute short film that follows a young woman (Georgina Campbell) trapped in a mysterious "floor" in an office building. Will she follow the plea for help of whatever she finds on that floor?
This is yet another short film recommended by Tim Egan. It is one of those examples where a simple premise can get you far enough, as long as it's well executed. With such a small runtime, there isn't much to say about it, but it does have some eerie visuals and a creepy twist that might still catch you by surprise.
Grade: 3.5
AUDIO GUIDE
(2019, Elena)
https://i.imgur.com/1HikcnC.png
"You are now listening to the Belle Epoque art gallery audio guide series..."
Audio Guide follows Audrey Walker (Emma Wright), a young and aspiring artist that upon a visit to the Belle Epoque art gallery finds out that the audio guide system not only works to offer further insight into the existing works of art exhibited there, but also from anyone around her. Initially she finds it intriguing and amusing, until the audio guide system starts revealing more intimate and troubling information about those around her, including herself.
This is yet another short film recommended by Tim Egan. It is certainly an interesting premise that is very well executed by director Chris Elena and writer Lee Zachariah. Wright is also great as her character goes through a rollercoaster of emotions as she keeps on discovering new things.
On the surface, Audio Guide is simple enough to not be overwhelming, but it still packs a decent dose of existentialism in it, as the things the audio guide system reveals put Audrey's beliefs to the test. It begs the question of how much we really want to know about life, or how willing are we to be left "in the dark" about our most precious beliefs and our own future.
Grade: 3.5
For anyone interested, here are the links to these four shorts...
https://vimeo.com/138196014
https://vimeo.com/75251217
https://vimeo.com/253985701
https://vimeo.com/366479439
A BETTER TOMORROW
(1986, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/9sIPBdt.jpg
"I'm the cop, he's the thief. In the eyes of the law, we're on different paths."
A Better Tomorrow follows two brothers – Ho (Ti Lung) and Kit (Leslie Cheung) – that have followed "different paths". Kit aims to join the police, while Ho is one of the top members of a powerful Hong Kong triad, along with Mark Lee (Chow Yun-fat). Ho is planning to leave his life of crime, but he ends up being set up and sent to prison, while Mark ends up injured in a shootout which leaves him disabled and disgraced.
This is my first venture into John Woo's Hong Kong filmography, and it was quite a thing. Before this, my experience was limited to most of his 90's American efforts which I wasn't that crazy about, other than Face/Off. A Better Tomorrow feels like the birth of that, as he gives us lead characters with conflicts between them trying to get through them via over-stylized ultra-violence (and I mean that in a good way).
One of my main gripes is that Ti Lung, who is arguably the lead actor, is a bit bland and is easily over-staged by Cheung, and especially Chow Yun-fat. Cheung provides a strong emotional performance and feels like the one to root for, but the script keeps him a bit on the sidelines. Chow Yun-fat, on the other hand, owns every scene he's in. Part of it is because of his charisma, but a huge part of it is the way that Woo shoots him, jumping in the air, two guns in hand, cool as fu¢k.
That's the main strength of this film, and apparently most of Woo's films. The action setpieces are well staged and choreographed, and yes, kickass. The story in between those, however, feels a bit melodramatic, with a sappy score and some weak supporting performances. That doesn't include Waise Lee, who gives one of those great, "slimy" and villainous portrayals as Shing, the triad lackey that ends up rising to the top after Ho and Mark are out.
A Better Tomorrow might not be as polished as other action films or even some of Woo's later films (at least based on what little I've seen), but it is still a worthy action film and a great introduction to Hong Kong crime cinema.
Grade: 3
BRIDESMAIDS
(2011, Feig)
https://i.imgur.com/6Ut0Cco.png
"You got to stop feeling sorry for yourself, cause I do not associate with people that blame the world for their problems. cause you're your problem, Annie, and you're also your solution."
They say that when it rains, it pours. A saying that highlights how when something bad happens, it is usually followed by more bad things. That is the situation in which Annie (Kristen Wiig) finds herself in this comedy. Bridesmaids follows Annie, as she prepares to fulfill her duties as one of the bridesmaids for her best friend Lillian (Maya Rudolph). But jealousy and chaos strikes when she meets Lillian's new "best friend" Helen (Rose Byrne).
Annie and Helen are joined as bridesmaids by an assorted array of characters that include all the expected stereotypes. There's the married, cynical friend; the naive newlywed, and the loud-mouthed sister-in-law, Megan (Melissa McCarthy). But even though most of the plot involves the various shenanigans they go through, the truth is that this is Annie's story and how she needs to overcome her many failures.
I had heard some good things about this comedy, so while looking for something light to watch yesterday, I thought why not? The film follows a relatively predictable storyline. I mean, you can probably guess where things will go 10-20 minutes before they happen, but I appreciate the cast's chemistry and commitment. For the most part, those interactions work; especially with McCarthy, who is easily the most colorful of the characters.
But other than it's predictability, it's not a comedy that really made me laugh out loud. There were a lot of chuckles and solid moments, Jon Hamm has a pretty funny supporting role, and I really appreciate the bond that we can see grow between these friends. But beyond that, there's not a lot much to look at here.
Grade: 3
THE AMAZING BULK
(2012, Schoenbraun)
https://i.imgur.com/pCnFr6p.png
"No more failures!!"
That's what Dr. Henry Howard (Jordan Lawson) screams as he witnesses his 237th attempt to create a strength serum become a failure. But oh my, what a joy it was to witness this "failure" last weekend. I stumbled upon the trailer for this gem by pure accident, and just like Howard does with the strength serum later, I just couldn't resist the urge to try it.
The Amazing Bulk follows Howard's attempts to create this serum under orders of his girlfriend's father, General Darwin (Terence Lording), all while trying to keep his relationship with Hannah (Shevaun Kastl) afloat. But when he tries the serum on himself, he becomes "The Amazing Bulk", a super-strong purple creature that wreaks havoc on the city.
There's a mixture of incredulity and joy in witnessing something as ineptly made as this still make it through to the masses. In one of the most baffling decisions I've seen on film, The Amazing Bulk was filmed entirely in a green-screen stage with the director, Lewis Schoenbraun, substituting the background with stock images (some of which inexplicably include leprechauns). The performances are downright awful, and the overall story makes no sense.
Still, there's such an undeniable earnestness in imagining someone looking at the end product and think "Yep, that'll do it." The Amazing Bulk is one of those films where you can't help but laugh at how bad it is, so even if it was for the wrong reasons, I was somewhat entertained. Opening credits in Comic Sans font, computer cliparts used as props, stock footage of space rockets passed as nuclear missiles, and an impotent bad guy that lives in a castle with guards that carry medieval helmets, shields, spears... and wear T-shirts?
Schoenbraun went on to direct another feature film titled Aliens vs. Avatars (yes, a mockbuster of those two films), which I can only imagine was just as inept as this. For better or worse, he decided "that's it!" and went on to teach film in the Philippines. Much like Henry Howard in the film, it seems that he had enough and wanted "no more failures!"
Grade: 1
I challenge anyone to watch this trailer, and resist the urge to watch at least a bit of this trainwreck :laugh:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywaR-Lq_ayk
THE KILLER
(1989, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/62B5NDa.png
"At least we have one thing in common. We both use guns in our jobs. We just have different reasons."
The Killer follows Ah Jong (Chow Yun-fat), a hitman that decides to perform one last job in order to pay for the surgery of a singer he accidentally blinded during a previous shoot-out. As a result, he ends up relentlessly pursued by the triad members that double-cross him, as well as Li (Danny Lee), a cop that might be just as determined as him.
In many ways, this feels like an improved version of A Better Tomorrow. Not sure if it's because I saw both almost back-to-back but I see a lot of parallels between both films. From the fights against triads, the climatic Mexican standoffs, the clash between cop and criminal, and the strained brotherly relationship down to the bloody end.
That "brotherly" relationship is what provides the backbone of the film, as we see both cop and hitman go back and forth; first as they play cat and mouse, and then as they join forces for a common goal. Chow Yun-fat and Danny Lee have a great chemistry and you really believe the way their relationship grows as the film progresses.
Incidentally, Ah Jong's relationship with Jennie (Sally Yeh) doesn't feel as fleshed out which neuters some of the dramatic weight of the film. Even Ah Jong's relationship with his friend and mentor Sei (Chu Kong) feels more realized and heartfelt. Shing Fui-On does a lot of scenery chewing as the bad guy, but that makes him fun to watch.
But beside the performances, the main attraction of this film is the action setpieces and choreographies. There is an almost operatic fluidness to the way Woo films these stand-offs and shoot-outs that you can't help but be amazed by how gorgeous and cool it looks. There is such a nice mixture between the excesses of violence and the dance-like movements that you can't help but be amazed by it.
There is something really interesting about watching a film like The Killer, and recognizing its fingerprints in other action or crime films. From Woo's own Face/Off to The Matrix and John Wick; even L.A. Confidential, as different as it might be, has a ton of stylistic and thematic parallels to this. As it is, The Killer is probably one of the best action/crime films I've seen.
Grade: 4.5
SpelingError
04-15-23, 10:49 AM
You should check out Hard-Boiled as well. It's also great.
I like A Better Tomorrow more than you do, but you should still check out the sequel. There's a scene in it that you could make an entire Movie Loot episode about.
You should check out Hard-Boiled as well. It's also great.
I have Hard Boiled in the agenda for later this month.
I like A Better Tomorrow more than you do, but you should still check out the sequel. There's a scene in it that you could make an entire Movie Loot episode about.
ThatDarnMKS spoke highly of it to me on Twitter, so I will try to check it out as soon as I can, but I have three more Woo to check before that one.
THE EYES OF MY MOTHER
(2016, Pesce)
https://i.imgur.com/egywUlZ.jpg
"Loneliness can do strange things to the mind."
Set in an isolated farm, The Eyes of My Mother follows Francisca (Kika Magalhães), a young woman that finds herself immersed in loneliness. The remoteness of her life, only accompanied by her father and mother, is hit by tragedy which only drives her further into stranger and darker things.
This film came highly recommended by ThatDarnMKS, and it really didn't disappoint. Being the debut from director/writer Nicolas Pesce only made it more impressive. He has a way to patiently set the mood and create simple but disturbing images, but not necessarily with what he shows but rather what he implies. There really isn't much gore, but the implication of the things that happen is way worse.
Pesce uses deliberate camera movement and long takes to heighten that eerie and uneasy ambience. Plus, the black and white cinematography is gorgeous and gives a certain elegance to all the horrific things that are happening. That contrast of beauty and horror elevates what could've easily been an exploitative mess in less capable hands. The pace is slow, but I never felt it meandered or dragged. I suppose the 77 minute runtime also helps.
The film has a small cast of only a handful of significant characters, with Magalhães being the centerpiece. For a film with little dialogue, she manages to do a lot with expressions, looks, and body language, transmitting mixtures of confidence and insecurity, fear and trauma. Olivia Bond is also pretty good as the young Francisca, while Will Brill has a brief but unnerving performance. I also appreciated the way Pesce handled the character of the Father by mostly keeping him silent and in the background.
I still felt like something was missing, even if I can't fully put my finger on it. As disturbing and horrific as it is, I don't think I felt it hit me as hard as I was expecting or would've wanted. Regardless, The Eyes of My Mother is a finely crafted and harrowing portrayal of a lonely woman driven to the edges of sanity in strange ways, and I definitely look forward to more of Pesce's work.
Grade: 4
JACK-JACK ATTACK
(2005, Bird)
https://i.imgur.com/FHC6SYk.jpg
"Mrs. Parr, I can totally handle *anything* this baby can dish out."
That's how Kari's babysitting gig with Jack-Jack began; like any normal sitting, you know, with the reassuring of the parents. But as she will soon find out, weird things can happen when you take care of a hyper-active, hyper-powered super-baby like Jack-Jack.
This short film was filmed at the same time as The Incredibles, and the basic idea of it was supposed to be included in the film. However, it was eventually cut and expanded into a short film that was included in the DVD. It takes place within the same timeline of the climax of the film as Kari takes care of Jack-Jack while the Parr's are fighting Syndrome and his robot.
One of my favorite things is Bret Parker's voice-work as Kari. But overall, the short is fun and clever as we see all the ways Jack-Jack's powers manifest and how Kari reacts to *anything* the baby dishes out. With a 4-minute runtime, I'm sure you can totally handle it as well.
Grade: 3.5
WIND
(2019, Chang)
https://i.imgur.com/QDPORhm.jpg
"If everyone reaches far enough in their history, there’s one person that propelled the family forward and gave up a lot of their own opportunities. I hope people remember that person, because that gives you introspection about what you’re doing for the next generation."
Set in a weird gravity-challenged chasm, Wind follows a kid and his grandmother as they both try to use the few resources they have at hand to escape. The short is part of Pixar's SparkShorts initiative to encourage young animators and storytellers to tell personal stories through animation.
The above quote is from producer Jesús Martínez who, along with writer/director Edwin Chang, used both their family backgrounds as immigrants from Mexico and Korea respectively to propel the story. Some of that context is kinda there as you see the short, but reading about Chang and Martínez' inspiration really helped me appreciate it more.
Wind is a simple, but emotionally powerful short with some beautiful animation. But at the end of the day, it is a story of sacrifices and, like Martínez says, where we come from and what we do for those we love.
Grade: 4
BURROW
(2020, Sharafian)
https://i.imgur.com/eNPQtuK.jpg
"I saw that door of opportunity open a crack and it was time to throw my whole body through."
Creative processes can sometimes be tough and nerve-wracking. Whether it is because opportunities don't come or because things don't necessarily come through the way you envisioned, it can all lead to anxiety and frustration. The above quote is how director Madeline Sharafian describes the moment when she was offered the chance to direct a short film for Pixar.
Burrow follows a friendly but shy rabbit that has a plan to build the burrow of her dreams. However, her creative process is affected as she finds "obstacles" in every hole that she opens. The "obstacles" are none other than fellow creatures and "neighbors" that inhabit the same space, but the rabbit is too shy to allow others to see her project, moreover ask for help.
This is yet another short film that's part of Pixar's SparkShorts initiative, which gives Sarafian the opportunity to dig up and build what she has referred to as a "passion project". Burrow is a charming short that's full of cute animation and an earnest story for children, but one that we, as adults, can still get something from.
Grade: 3.5
KITBULL
(2019, Sullivan)
https://i.imgur.com/9gS2HJp.jpg
"I related to this kitten because it never really stepped out of its comfort zone to be vulnerable and make a connection."
Kitbull follows the unlikely bond formed between a stray cat and an abused pitbull. The third of Pixar's SparkShorts initiative that I saw this month, it was written and directed by Rosana Sullivan, a storyboard artist that has worked with Pixar since 2011. She described the experience of writing the short with the above quote.
It is so refreshing to see art like this being borne out of personal experiences instead of corporate brainstorming. Like Burrow, the animation in Kitbull is simple but effective. Despite that apparent simplicity, it is charming and touching, but also powerful in its depiction of animal abuse.
However, the most important thing is the way the short shows these two unlikely animals putting their trust in each other and creating a bond. It is an invitation to step out of our comfort zone and connect. The results might surprise us.
Grade: 3.5
LOOP
(2020, Milsom)
https://i.imgur.com/4EyOpzd.jpg
"Sorry. Anyways, I think I'm just gonna hang out and wait... till you tell me what you want."
Ever felt like you're trying to communicate with someone who just doesn't understand you, and you get stuck in a loop? That's the situation two young kids find themselves in this beautiful short from Pixar. Loop follows Renee and Marcus as they share a canoe trip at camp.
The thing is that Renee is a non-verbal autistic girl, while Marcus talks quite a bit. I don't have a lot of experience with non-verbal autistic people, but I feel like this short film does a great job of portraying their struggles at communicating. One of the most notable things is how Renee uses a sound app on her phone to transmit her various feelings.
But the most important thing the short does is in how Marcus is always willing to engage with Renee, make her feel comfortable, and even when things get rough, he has the patience to give her space and wait; anything that can be done to break out of that miscommunication loop.
I do think that the short peaks halfway through, but seeing and reading about the making of the short, I really appreciate the efforts that director/writer Erica Milsom and her team went to cast an actual non-verbal autistic girl for the voice of Renee. It gives a true sense of authenticity to the short; one that I wish can teach us, much like Marcus, to be patient so we can break out of those loops.
Grade: 3.5
If you don't do an episode about this just so you can call it The Movie Loot Loop I swear to...
OUT
(2020, Hunter)
https://i.imgur.com/HHMZKsL.jpg
"This hurts... This *really* hurts."
Out follows Greg (Kyle McDaniel), a young gay man that's struggling with the decision to come out to his parents. But things get crazy when they unexpectedly visit him to help him move, and he ends up with his mind swapped with his dog, Jim. Greg/Jim then spends the rest of the short trying to hide any evidence of him being gay from his parents.
I'm not gay, but I can only assume that coming out has never been easy. Stigmas and discrimination makes the process really hard on everybody involved, and more often than not, people get hurt in the process. However, sometimes the hurt doesn't necessarily come from the "revelation", but rather from the lack of communication and trust between the family.
That's what happens with Greg's mom (Bernadette Sullivan) when she says the above quote. In his efforts to prevent his mom from looking at a picture of him with his boyfriend, Greg/Jim bites her. But ultimately, the hurt doesn't come from the bite or from her son being gay, but from losing that connection between each other.
The fact that it is inspired in director/writer Steven Hunter's own life experience only makes it more real... except for the mind-swap thing, of course. Maybe the way that mind-swapped thing is tossed in there seems a bit odd and out-of-left-field, but it does reinforce the theme of "pretending to be something else", while also putting out the way that we hurt others while trying to hide who we are.
Grade: 3.5
BULLET IN THE HEAD
(1990, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/JjsESsU.jpg
"Today I saw a soldier kill a man and I learned something. In this world, we can do anything if we have guns!"
Set in the late 1960s, Bullet in the Head follows three childhood friends: Ben, Paul, and Frank (Tony Leung, Waise Lee, and Jacky Cheung), that flee from Hong Kong to Vietnam to escape from a rival gang as well as the police. However, as they try to make it as contraband smugglers in the middle of the Vietnam War, the three friends end up at odds with a Vietnamese gangster as well as the Vietcong, all of which puts their friendship to the test.
When I said I was watching this, ThatDarnMKS said it was like adding "some Mean Streets and Deer Hunter flavoring" to A Better Tomorrow; and he's not wrong, because you get the feeling that there are like 3 or 4 films mashed here. Originally written as a prequel to A Better Tomorrow, this film has most of the elements that made Woo popular, like extensive gun fights and "brothers" at odds with each other, but adds the war element as well as that "brothers torn apart" spin to it.
It is obvious that, after films like A Better Tomorrow and The Killer, Woo was trying to spread his wings a bit. The scope here feels more ambitious and the narrative seems to aim for more depth. Unfortunately, I don't think that Woo fully delivered on the promise. As hinted above, the film does feel like a bit of a mess. There is a bit of tonal dissonance between the violence and the drama, and the last act felt clumsily hyper-charged instead of being something more emotionally powerful.
That said, the film is saved by some solid performances by the three leads, especially Waise Lee and Tony Leung. Simon Yam is also great as a Vietnamese mercenary that joins the trio as they reach Vietnam. The way that Woo builds strong brotherly relationships is quite something, but is weird that he can't fully replicate that with romantic relationships. Here, the character of Sally, a singer that the group tries to rescue, feels very underdeveloped, and so does the relationship between Ben and his wife.
Judging from what I've read about this film, it seems that I'm firmly in the minority. Regardless of my reaction, the film does deliver some nice action setpieces and neat performances. So if you're someone that enjoys Woo, maybe this will work for you. Sadly, it didn't work as well for me.
Grade: 2.5
https://i.imgur.com/Dir8TWp.gif
Mr Minio
04-24-23, 04:05 PM
https://youtu.be/Qqdp8llgAMw
WHAT...? YOU DISLIKED IT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! THE MUSIC IS TOO LOUD
OH, YOU DID LIKE IT? THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. A GREAT MOVIE ISN'T IT?
HARD BOILED
(1992, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/nVZNfgI.jpg
"To you, I'm a criminal. To my mum, I'm a son. To the triads, I'm a hero."
That is how tormented undercover agent Alan (Tony Leung) describes himself to detective Tequila Yuen (Chow Yun-fat). This hints at the inner struggles of playing two different people at the same time, something which Alan has to deal with, especially if he wants to take down his triad boss. Hard Boiled follows the efforts of the two to do so.
After opening the film with a balls-out shoot-out at a restaurant, Woo slows down into what you think will be a more subdued and morally complex crime thriller, where the struggles mentioned above come into play. Instead, by the last act, our heroes are jumping to the side shooting endless bullets at a constant swarm of nameless bad guys as a hospital literally blows up on top of them. It is the epitome of excesses of Woo and action films in general.
In lesser hands, this would all end up being a mess. But with Woo, there is an almost operatic fluidity to it all. It is chaos, but it feels like concerted chaos as Tequila and Alan slide and fly through floors and stairs dodging storms of bullets and fire. However, as cool as Woo's explosions are, it does get to a point of numbing. By that last act, you can't really feel the stakes anymore and it's all just mindless "rat-tat-tat".
There are also some pointless hints at a romantic relationship between Tequila and a female partner that end up going nowhere. As it has become evident to me with this Woo binge, he continues to fail at building strong and successful romantic relationships while exceling at building strong brotherly connections between his leads. A big part of what makes this film work is Chow Yun-fat's charisma and Leung's emotionally strong performance. The latter brings a good dose of pathos and conflict to his character, even if the script doesn't fully care about it.
This was my fourth Hong Kong Woo outing and it's been an interesting journey so far. Like I said in a previous review, to see his fingerprints and visual flare imitated in other action or crime films has been quite a thing. I certainly wish he would pay just as much attention to his scripts, but I'll settle for the balls-to-the-wall, crazy action setpieces and cool characters for now.
Grade: 3.5
HARD TARGET
(1993, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/S2nyZbd.png
"Boudreaux is wounded. He's been pursued and harried across miles of open country. Now he's cornered and outnumbered 20 to 1. He's an annoying little f-ucking insect and I want him stepped on hard."
I consider The Most Dangerous Game one of my favorite short stories. I read it back when I was a teen and fell in love with it. I found the story of a ruthless aristocrat that hunts humans just for fun so wicked and thrilling. I've read the story again a bunch of times since and found it holds up pretty well, which is probably why it has lent itself to so many adaptations. From 1932's RKO adventure trip to a Tremors 2020 sequel inspired by it.
The 1990s brought us two loose adaptations of the story set in modern times: John Woo's Hard Target and Ernest Dickerson's Surviving the Game. For some reason, I've seen the latter... several times, but never got around the former. Maybe because it featured Jean-Claude Van Damme in the lead role and, at the time, I had already gotten my fair share of Van Damme's. So imagine my surprise when, during this recent Woo binge I've been doing, I catch up with this and it ended up not only *not* sucking, but also being a lot of fun.
The film follows Van Damme (Chance Boudreaux) as a homeless drifter and veteran in New Orleans that ends up being hunted by a team of organized and ruthless hunters led by Emil Fouchon (Lance Henriksen) and his right-hand man Pik Van Cleef (Arnold Vosloo). This was Woo's first Hollywood film and, although I'd say it is a bit more of a Van Damme film than a Woo film, it still has a good dose of Woo trademarks to please his fans.
One of the biggest weaknesses of the film falls on its two leads. Van Damme looks the part and sells the brooding tough guy persona well, but he doesn't go beyond that. Luckily, the script doesn't ask much from him in terms of emotion. Yancy Butler, who plays the woman that Boudreaux is helping, doesn't run the same luck, though; she's pretty bad. The two are joined in the last act by Wilford Brimley in a laughably bad supporting role as Van Damme's "Cajun" uncle.
On the other hand, what makes the film sizzle are its two bad guys. Henriksen and Vosloo are so wickedly good that I wouldn't mind putting their names on a list of "Best 90's action villains". Their chemistry and back-and-forth banter is so delightful that you love to hate them, and I would say it's reason enough to check it out. It is Fouchon the one who says the above quote as he and his goons prepare to capture Boudreaux once and for all.
The way the action unfolds is part Van Damme and part Woo. There is a good dose of the typical Van Damme bad-assery and silliness that we're used to see in his films. However, you also get a lot of Woo, with some elaborate action setpieces, some great gun play, and lots of dazzling acrobatics. Like with the previous Woo films I've seen, it was nice to see and recognize the influence this gets from previous Woo films, but also the ripples it makes on future action films.
Grade: 3.5
MALIGNANT
(2021, Wan)
https://i.imgur.com/l6VXjH3.png
"There's no one there ... It's all in my head. It's all in my head. It's all in my head."
Malignant follows Madison (Annabelle Wallis) who, after being assaulted by her abusive boyfriend, starts experiencing a string of hallucinations and visions of murders that end up happening in reality. The above quote is how she tries to comfort herself at one point after listening strange sounds in the night. "It's all in my head..." But in this case, what's in her head might end up being worse than anything else.
This film starts as many modern horror films where strange occurrences start tormenting our lead character, making us question her sanity and state of mind. Director James Wan does a solid job of building up the tension and mystery of what's happening around Madison, and he does it well enough that when he sweeps the rug from under our feet in the last act, it makes you go like "what??"
You gotta admire a film that goes all in with a completely batshit crazy twist and that's what Malignant does. It doesn't really cowers from the total absurdity of what happens trying to sell itself as so-called "elevated horror", but rather commits to it all the way. This makes it feel all the more fresh, unique, and yes, fun.
There are a couple of shaky performances here and there, and overall there isn't really a standout, though. However, this is a film that relies on pure story and direction. Most of the kills are good, and there is a sequence in that last act that's pretty cool and impressive. There are a lot of things that surely wouldn't hold up to closer scrutiny, but as far as wickedly fun, bonkers horror films go, Malignant delivers.
Grade: 3.5
HOSTAGE
(2002, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/0mODp7p.png
"Words... are cheap. Words... come and go. All I wanted from her was a gesture."
Hostage is the sixth short film from this BMW project dubbed The Hire, which follows a nameless driver (Clive Owen) hired by different clients to perform different tasks. In this case, the driver is hired by the FBI to serve as the courier in a hostage situation. A disgruntled employee (Maury Chaykin) has kidnapped his CEO (Kathryn Morris) and is asking for... a gesture. Is it the money or is it something else?
This is the third of these short films that I watch, but I'm constantly surprised and baffled by how unique they are. Each short carries its own flavoring, whether it is Wong Kar-wai, Tony Scott, or in this case, John Woo. As simple as it has to be for a 9-minute short, it has enough of his fast-paced, action style to remind you this is Woo's short, especially as the driver has to take his BMW Z4 3.0i [insert link to BMW website] and drive it real fast in order to reach the hostage in time.
Chaykin is particularly good as the kidnapper, and the script gives him enough good lines and moments to make it feel more like what we expect from an actual feature than a "car ad". The final chase is full of thrills, and there's a pretty neat twist in the end that caught me off guard. Being a BMW short, all I wanted from it was to kill 10 minutes, but I got a bit more than that.
Grade: 4
LAST HURRAH FOR CHIVALRY
(1979, Woo)
https://i.imgur.com/wDEAFX4.jpg
"When it comes to friendship there are just too many moves. You just can't defend against them all."
Last Hurrah for Chivalry begins with a bloody confrontation between warring clans during the wedding of Lord Kao (Lau Kong). To seek revenge against the ruthless Pak Chung Tong (Lee Hoi-sang), Kao hires two killers: Tsing Yi (Damian Lau) and Chang San (Wai Pak). But with honor and loyalty on the line, can they all keep track of the many moves from each other?
As I was about to close my journey through John Woo's filmography, I wanted to see something that predated the 80s-90s crime films I had already seen, so I settled for this wuxia from 1979. It was quite nice to find out pretty much all the elements that Woo has popularized in his later films – lots of fights and blood, acrobatics, with two "brothers" in the middle of it all – but transposed to ancient China.
Like pretty much every single Woo film I've seen (with the exception of Hard Target), the backbone of this film is in the interactions between Tsing Yi and Chang San. Once they finally pair together, their chemistry sizzles. The thing is that although they meet very early, the film does take a while to put them together for good. The journey is fun, but it does feel a bit "questy": find this sword here, beat this other swordsmen there.
But this leads me to the other strength of the film, and that is in its amazing fight choreographies, which are highlighted often. It is pretty much as if you swapped the guns from Woo's later films with swords, because there's the same stylized and acrobatic approach to the fights. The way they unfold doesn't necessarily make sense from a realistic point of view, but they do look cool as hell.
Some of the performances do feel a bit exaggerated, but I suppose it is a thing of the times and place. There are also a couple of female characters whose role I'm still not entirely convinced that works (yet another parallelism with Woo's later career). However, the film more than makes up with a memorable villain in Pak Chung Tong, two great heroes, and a good dose of moves you probably can't defend against.
Grade: 4
This one has potential for a 4.5, to be honest. I really dug it.
ApexPredator
05-01-23, 10:24 PM
HARD TARGET
(1993, Woo)
The two are joined in the last act by Wilford Brimley in a laughably bad supporting role as Van Damme's "Cajun" uncle.
Grade: 3.5
I had a different reaction to Brimley showing up. For me, it was ridiculous but he showed up with such an enthusiastic performance (like someone stuck cajun seasoning in his oatmeal) that it gave the film life when he was on screen. He proved to be a highlight for me.
Then again, I'd probably give Target maybe a 3 when I saw it all those years ago.
I had a different reaction to Brimley showing up. For me, it was ridiculous but he showed up with such an enthusiastic performance (like someone stuck cajun seasoning in his oatmeal) that it gave the film life when he was on screen. He proved to be a highlight for me.
Then again, I'd probably give Target maybe a 3 when I saw it all those years ago.
Oh, I wouldn't disagree with you about Brimley. Whether you see it as a "laughably bad" performance as I did, or an "enthusiastic" one as you did, I think the result is definitely a highlight :laugh:
EVIL DEAD
(2013, Alvarez)
https://i.imgur.com/TOVMGhF.jpg
"He's not gonna let you leave, and he's not gonna stop till he has you. Until he has all of you!"
The Evil Dead franchise is one of the most popular among cinephiles and horror fans. Everybody loves Ash and Sam Raimi's groovy mixture of blood and laughs... except for me. For some weird reason, it's a franchise I haven't clicked with, even though I love horror films and I enjoy a lot of horror comedies. It happened with The Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2, and even Drag Me to Hell.
Despite this, I've always been curious about this remake. Maybe because I've read good things about it, or maybe because I appreciate Fede Alvarez' approach to horror, but I finally decided to budge and it didn't disappoint. Similar to the original, the remake follows a group of five people that visit a remote cabin in the woods and end up being terrorized by a demonic supernatural being.
Unlike the Raimi entries, this remake leans more into horror than it does into comedy as there is little humor in the film. Instead, Alvarez maintains a constant sense of dread through the film where nothing feels quite right. Obviously part of that is because they are five people in a remote cabin in an Evil Dead film, but I think Alvarez direction does a great job of transmitting that uneasiness and discomfort.
The catalyst for them being in that cabin is to help Mia (Jane Levy) as she tries to overcome her addiction problems by going "cold turkey". Other than her estranged brother David (Shiloh Fernandez), you can sense that the rest of the cast is pretty much doomed, but they all do a solid job within the boundaries of their characters. The relationship issues between Mia and David, as well as their parents, is barely brushed upon but it works to make the backstory feel a bit more organic.
Other than that, one of the main reasons to watch such a film is the gore and there's plenty of it. From stabbings and slices with needles, knifes, and shards of glass, to gross vomits and multiple dismemberments; there's a bit of everything. The last act does stretch credibility a bit with one of the characters building an improvised defibrillator and resurrecting a certain character with it, but I was already on board.
Four films and one TV show into the franchise, and this is the one that works. Looks like the powers behind the Evil Dead franchise are not gonna let me leave, and they're not gonna stop till they have me. Well, after this one, which probably guarantees that I will check Evil Dead Rise at some point, I would say they finally got me.
Grade: 4
Here's my summary for APRIL 2023:
For various personal and logistical reasons, I couldn't do my usual challenge, but I still managed to log a decent amount of short and feature films in the following categories:
New millennium horror: Scream (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382117-scream.html) (2022), The Eyes of My Mother (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383462-the_eyes_of_my_mother.html), Malignant (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384752-malignant.html), Evil Dead (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2385371-evil_dead.html) (2013)
Short films: Avatar (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382243-avatar.html) (2005), Next Floor (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382247-next_floor.html), Floor 9.5 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382250-floor_9.5.html), Audio Guide (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382258-audio_guide.html)
Pixar shorts: Jack-Jack Attack (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383545-jack-jack_attack.html), Wind (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383605-wind.html), Burrow (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383683-burrow.html), Kitbull (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383735-kitbull.html), Loop (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383983-loop.html), Out (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2383993-out.html)
John Woo films: A Better Tomorrow (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382504-a_better_tomorrow.html), The Killer (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382740-the_killer.html), Bullet in the Head (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384047-bullet_in_the_head.html), Hard Boiled (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384074-hard_boiled.html), Hard Target (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384448-hard_target.html), Hostage (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384811-hostage.html) (2002), Last Hurrah for Chivalry (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2385234-last_hurrah_for_chivalry.html)
Other films: Bridesmaids (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382626-bridesmaids.html), The Amazing Bulk (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2382630-the_amazing_bulk.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/1m3W6cpgwuIyjtg5nSnPx7yFkXW.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/hoR1TAxIkO1rRHu3F7cWzKZqxq.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/dGv2BWjzwAz6LB8a8JeRIZL8hSz.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/1gDV0Lm9y8ufIKzyf0h0GBgb9Zj.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gmnD2e1RvMdCl9D1rsDEQaQlJxK.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/1HBizk472Kb0SY8NM8XTbig2xpm.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/8zUayaiUp1DVKR25EV0Q7Pu0Qk4.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/s9ZQ6uC2mYJOaZhk1enWMWTfywd.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/30J7SeySVn7pm84x3vejZpenH5M.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/eCQOiAWjXmRPlktXFEu4vt22Kz2.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zkQcHvMc7gVG6OWVotVLDeRkrRl.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/mwKO3cZbxipgd9QAPboJVTDLPiN.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/pUA0cnrZnm8IRx1NMcr9FiOsAI7.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/kU3YYulx2RNB8TYns7a2QR9CqEP.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/56vi7JCrVZuCqBPDVLzfO5fEQMr.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/8hTxlSqMAHBXAh1eB69ir0BXhzE.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5tY6VtjHlQl4dOjVNhzyJaItkdr.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/wuljacjo7DCzUzDianeZZwPb6to.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/kufvuQYWdl82sYzmhy2naBLyMui.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/d5CoQrPoN0h6h2BaZHAJNgWalJx.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/iyQgjnos8dFBR8ypcHy4Q3EI59L.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gJtA7hYsBMQ7EM3sPBMUdBfU7a0.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ib2V6JNOsQHIR7wmgezCUoQHnV3.jpg
There were no rewatches, and my favorite was probably The Killer, followed by Last Hurrah for Chivalry and The Eyes of My Mother.
My least favorite was easily The Amazing Bulk, but the laughable value on that one is high :laugh:
Since I was so deep into my John Woo binge, I decided to dedicate Special Episode 17 of The Movie Loot to my favorite of his American/Hollywood output. In this episode I talk about Face/Off; specifically the scene when Castor-as-Sean visits Sean-as-Castor in prison. However, I also dig a bit into how the film connects into Woo's filmography:
The Movie Loot - Special Episode XVII (Face/Off) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12754005-the-movie-loot-special-episode-xvii-face-off.mp3?download=true)
Remember you can also listen on Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-special-episode-xvii-face-off/id1578191119?i=1000612117341), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/7vrOW9UDdPjgK0VNuwdJ0S?si=7eadd13df2634c90), Google Podcasts, and most podcast platforms.
PASSAGE OF VENUS
(1874, Janssen)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LowU9vKZzJs
Films from 1874 seen *check*
ETERNALS
(2021, Zhao)
https://i.imgur.com/72WkTB9.jpg
"Are we really helping these people build a better world? We're just like the soldiers down there: pawns to their leaders, blinded by loyalty."
"In the beginning..." That is how the opening crawl of this film kicks things off. Singularities, Celestials, Deviants... Eternals! In less than a minute this film establishes a certain tone and a certain vibe that I'm still trying to figure out if it does the film more harm or good. Regardless of where you fall on, this film doesn't feel like part of the existing MCU, at least not fully.
Eternals follows the titular immortal heroes, led by Ajax (Salma Hayek), as they wrestle with their duty to protect Earth and humanity from Deviants and their ultimate purpose and reason to exist as established by the Celestials. The Biblical and religious parallelisms are not subtle as our characters seem to be torn between the pulls of good and evil, what they want to do and what they have to do.
There are ten Eternals, but the focus of the story falls on Sersi (Gemma Chan) who, after centuries of disagreements and internal conflicts, leads the team into reuniting when a new type of Deviant attacks her and her partner, Sprite (Lia McHugh). This attack also invokes the presence of their leader, Ikaris (Richard Madden), who was also Sersi's boyfriend for almost 2,000 years.
Much has been said about the Eternals flaws, its pace and dialogue, and most of those criticisms are valid. The pace is indeed a bit off and the dialogue is often clunky and too expository, but I appreciated the theme of purpose, fate, and free will, even if I feel it wasn't executed to its full potential. I know a lot of people have argued that the film was slow and boring, but I don't think it was a bad film, just a sputtering one.
Part of that might have to do with how it tries to juggle too many characters. There are TEN Eternals and even though the film tries to give each of them a moment to shine, there's no way you can do that in *checks notes* 2 hours and 37 minutes. What better proof of this than me not being able to find a decent picture that featured all TEN Eternals in one shot! (sorry, Druig) Most of the potential depth that any of them could've had is obviously diluted.
There are some solid individual performances, though. Chan is pretty good as the emotionally vulnerable lead character, Hayek does a solid job with a small role, and Kumail Nanjiani steals most of his scenes as Kingo. On the other hand, Madden's performance is a bit uneven as he goes from stoic and wooden to volatile and angry. I think he gets a bit better as the film progresses and he gets to reveal more of him, though.
The chemistry between the group also doesn't feel organic with most of their conflicts feeling fabricated. There is a particular turn towards the last act that feel forced and out of nowhere, while quality actors (Oscar-nominated actors!) like Barry Keoghan and Brian Tyree Henry are a bit wasted. One exception is the performance and relationship between Gilgamesh (Don Lee) and Thena (Angelina Jolie), which is the only one that has some charm to it. A big part of it goes to Lee, who probably has my favorite performance after Nanjiani.
Directed by Oscar-winner Chloe Zhao, Eternals feels like it exists in a slightly different plane to other MCU films; more meditative, more ambitious depth, broader scope. But it also puts to the forefront what I'm sure was a bit of a push-and-pull to make the film feel more in line with the universe, and you kinda feel that strain. From directing more independent and auteur projects to directing in the world's biggest franchise (for none other than Disney), I imagine that Zhao felt more or less like the Eternals: just like a soldier, pawn to her leaders.
Grade: 2.5
I forgot to share this, but here is the "assignment" episode I'm doing in the podcast for May.
The Movie Loot: The May Assignment (with Mel Valentin) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12871538)
In this one, my friend and film writer/critic Mel Valentin joins the loot as we choose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-may-assignment-with-mel-valentin/id1578191119?i=1000613542169), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/41GiCyAz5l3FgMztHBEbAd?si=6fc0a5b7c0894ea2), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjg3MTUzOA?sa=X&ved=0CAgQuIEEahcKEwig4bP5u4X_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), or any other.
Here are the criteria for MAY 2023:
A film from the recent Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time whose ranking includes the number 5:
A film mostly set on a train (Nat'l Train Day, May 13):
A film from the 1950s:
A film from Croatia (Statehood Day, May 30):
A film from Paraguay (Independence Day, May 14-15):
I CONFESS
(1953, Hitchcock)
A film from the 1950s
https://i.imgur.com/YjZXezN.jpg
"I never thought of the priesthood as offering a hiding place."
Confession, or the Sacrament of Penance, is one of the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church through which any person can confess their transgressions to God through a priest. Intended to provide healing for the soul as well as to regain forgiveness, the confession creates a "sacred trust" between the penitent and the priest that, according to Roman Catholic canon law, is "inviolable". It adds that it is "forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason". But what if the sin is murder and the confessor ends up as the accused instead of the penitent?
I Confess follows Father Logan (Montgomery Clift), who finds himself in the above predicament after the housekeeper of his church confesses killing a lawyer. Unfortunately for Logan, as a result of a series of coincidences which ties him to the lawyer, he ends up as the main suspect in the eyes of relentless Inspector Larrue (Karl Malden), along with Ruth (Anne Baxter), a childhood friend of Logan that might also be tied to the lawyer in some way.
This is one of Hitchcock's lesser known films and one of those that's not as well regarded as his other work, which is probably the reason why I hadn't seen it yet. However, when writer Tony Lee Moral spoke highly of it on a past episode of the podcast, I decided to bump it up on my Hitchcock queue. The film comes at a time when Hitchcock seemed to be interested in more thematically deep films that explored the nature of man rather than more stylistic and visual exercises.
Unfortunately, he doesn't do as much as he could or should with the premise or the characters. Even though he hints at thought-provoking themes, there really isn't much exploration about Logan's conflict as a priest regarding this confession or much introspection into his frame of mind about his relationship with Ruth. There isn't a lot of interaction with the actual killer either, which also eliminates a lot of the tension that the film could've had, resorting instead to the relationship between Logan and Ruth, which is not as developed as it should've to bear any significant weight.
It is said that the film went through a series of script revisions and re-writes, which I think is noticeable in the end product. Regardless of that, I Confess still manages to be a fairly decent thriller. Hitchcock's direction lacks most of his iconic flair, but it is still effective and well done. The performances are also solid, especially Malden and Roger Dann as Ruth's husband, Pierre, who I think gives some depth to a character that could've ended up with none. Even with this strengths, I must confess that this is mid-tier Hitchcock.
Grade: 3
PURL
(2018, Lester)
https://i.imgur.com/PZhg7Am.png
"What I mean to say is that I can't wait to be part of the team."
Being the new person at any place can be a huge reason for stress for anybody. Whether it is a new school, a new job, or just a new neighborhood, the anxiety about who will be around you and whether or not they will accept you is very real and very common. This is what serves as the basis of this Pixar animated short film.
Purl follows the titular character, an enthusiastic ball of yarn, as she arrives at her first day of work at investment company B.R.O. Capital (get it?... BRO) Unfortunately, the place is plagued left and right by narrow-minded male co-workers all of which look the same, dress the same, and act the same, which ends up leaving Purl a bit on the courtside.
Directed by Kristen Lester, she took inspiration on her own career journey towards Pixar where she was often the only woman; something that she described as "isolating". Purl does a pretty good job at illustrating that in a creative way, while showing the lengths that sometimes we go in order to fit in and be accepted.
According to an interview with Lester, things are much better now than they were when she started. She says she has gone from being "the only woman" on a story team, to being in movies with "a female director", "a female head of story", she has "led a story team that had four women on it", all of which she describes as "inspiring and exciting". But much like Purl did, we all need to take a step forward for real change to occur in order for *everybody* to be and *feel* as part of the team.
Grade: 3
THE TRAIN
(1964, Frankenheimer)
A film mostly set on a train
https://i.imgur.com/IHhoyrU.jpg
"You know what's on that train? Paintings. That's right, paintings. Art. The national heritage. The pride of France. Crazy, isn't it?"
That's how Paul Labiche (Burt Lancaster), train engineer and member of the French Resistance, describes the cargo of stolen art on board of the titular train that he has been commissioned to take out of France and into Germany by Col. Franz von Waldheim (Paul Scofield). The thing is that Labiche doesn't necessarily care about the art, but rather about stopping the Germans at any cost.
What a pleasant surprise this film was. Not only does it manage to be both entertaining, intense, and thrilling, but there's also a certain depth to the two main characters that I really wasn't expecting from it. The film is full of masterfully staged setpieces and cracking action sequences. Director John Frankenheimer frequent use of pans and zooms, wide shots, long takes, and practical effects is amazing and effective. The whole production value of the film is top of the line.
But again, the film is so much more than great action setpieces. Frankenheimer neatly puts both lead characters – Labiche and von Waldheim – as "mirror opposites" as far as their determination goes, and the length that each of them will go to achieve their goals. There is a perfect contrast between them that goes down to the very last scene, which I found to be profound, tragic, and kick-ass at the same time, as weird as that might be.
Lancaster, who is becoming a favorite of mine as I watch more of his films, isn't necessarily the most emotional, but he does portray the necessary drive and bottled anger of the character against the things that are happening around him. Scofield, who I don't remember seeing in anything else, also conveys the obsession of his character with this art pieces, which borders in madness. I was really surprised by his performance.
Maybe my only gripe is that the relationship they try to build between Labiche and hotel owner Christine (Jeanne Moreau) isn't that well handled or maybe even necessary, but it really didn't bother me that much. The more I think of this film, the more I love it, and the more I think it was as perfect as it could be; an excellent mixture of action, thrills, and powerful drama. Crazy, isn't it?
Grade: 4.5
GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 2
(2017, Gunn)
https://i.imgur.com/HmyvYi0.jpg
"For the first time in my existence, I am truly NOT ALONE!!"
That's what Celestial and living-planet-turned-cool-daddy Ego (Kurt Russell) proudly proclaims at a climatic moment in this second installment of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise. After centuries and centuries, he's not alone anymore. He has finally found a worthy son in Peter (Chris Pratt), which can help him achieve his ultimate goal.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 mostly follows this relationship, as Peter has to come to terms with his true self and the consequences it might have on the team. Meanwhile, Yondu (Michael Rooker) is tasked by Ayesha, the Golden Priestess of the Sovereign, to find the Guardians after she is slighted by them, something that Yondu takes as an opportunity to redeem himself as a Ravager and maybe something more.
Whatever the respective goals of Ego and Yondu are, the thing is that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is ultimately a movie about lonely characters looking for ways to reconnect with others; whether it is a father and a son, sisters at odds, or characters that have never had a chance or a desire to connect with others (i.e. Mantis or Rocket?). For better or worse, this film offers them all a chance to finally find a connection with someone.
This was actually the third time I watch this film, but it's the first time that I can say I enjoyed it. First time, the conditions were simply not the best, but even the second time, it really didn't hit. Not sure why, but this time the central themes were clearer for me and, although I still think it has its flaws, I really appreciated it more.
One of my main issues is with the character of Yondu, and how his development and need for connection here feels pretty far from the Yondu we saw on the first film. This makes most of the emotional baggage in the third act to feel out of left field and somewhat forced. Still, Rooker's performance and Gunn's direction sell the material well enough.
The plot also feels a bit scattered as all of the characters are split with different subplots each, with some of them feeling wasted (like Drax). Still, some of them work pretty well, especially the Gamora and Nebula conflict. Plus, how can I write a review and not address how incredibly adorable Baby Groot is?
Being an MCU film, it really can't help to follow the MCU formula and devolve in the last act into the usual CGI Bash-a-thon, but the film still has enough solid action and good laughs for me to finally connect with it. Can't wait to check out Vol. 3 and see where Gunn takes this characters.
Grade: 3
PHOENIX74
05-26-23, 03:13 AM
Being an MCU film, it really can't help to follow the MCU formula and devolve in the last act into the usual CGI Bash-a-thon, but the film still has enough solid action and good laughs for me to finally connect with it. Can't wait to check out Vol. 3 and see where Gunn takes this characters.
I thought the 2nd Guardians of the Galaxy film was a significant step-down from the first - the 3rd one is a lot better. Still can't beat that first one, but there's a much better balance of comedy, wonderful visuals, action and story.
I thought the 2nd Guardians of the Galaxy film was a significant step-down from the first - the 3rd one is a lot better. Still can't beat that first one, but there's a much better balance of comedy, wonderful visuals, action and story.
I haven't seen the third one yet, but I agree about the 2nd one being "a step-down" from the first. The first one is probably my #1 or #2 MCU film and this one's definitely not at that level. Still, like I said on my review, it went up for me on this third watch.
CASABLANCA
(1942, Curtiz)
A film from the Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time list whose ranking includes the #5 (#65)
https://i.imgur.com/lmJghRg.jpg
"My dear Ricky, I suspect that under that cynical shell, you are at heart a sentimentalist."
Set in the titular city in 1941 Morocco, Casablanca follows Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart), an American cafe owner with a cynical shell, but maybe a sentimentalist heart. So when a former lover, Ilsa (Ingrid Bergman) unknowingly ends up at his cafe looking for safe passage to America for her husband, Rick has to decide whether to help them or not.
Casablanca has been a favorite of mine for a long time, but for some reason, I hadn't seen it in a while. So when the opportunity to rewatch it came this month, I really didn't hesitate much. What else can be said about a film like this? If anything, I think this time I appreciated more how seamlessly it moves between romance and drama to adventure and thrills; from the bitterness of Rick to the perfect comedic timings of Captain Renault (Claude Rains); from the romance between Rick and Ilsa to the powerful "La Marseillaise" scene.
Casablanca is the perfect example of a studio production coming to fruition in a way that feels harmoniously constructed from all angles. The film is a masterpiece and by most accounts, pretty much perfect; Curtiz direction is flawless, the script offers depth to the characters while giving an endless supply of memorable lines, the performances are all top-notch, and that ending!
Speaking about the cast, Bogart was born to play this role, while Bergman does so much with her eyes and body language. On the other hand, Rains crafts a truly compelling and layered character that happens to be funny, but that feels real and complex. If anything, Paul Henreid's Victor Lazslo is the character that I feel warranted maybe a tad more. The cast is rounded out by excellent supporting performances from Sidney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Conrad Veidt, and Dooley Wilson.
I know that raving about this film can be seen as cliché and predictable, but it is so for a reason. It is the kind of film that I feel deserves praise about pretty much everything in it, from pretty much everybody; regardless of how cynical is your shell.
Grade: 5
SMASH AND GRAB
(2019, Larsen)
https://i.imgur.com/yntYGn5.jpg
"It was during a time when I felt tethered to things that I couldn’t fully crack at that moment in time in my life, things I couldn’t quite accomplish. Doing SparkShorts allowed me to break free, and it fulfilled me."
That's how director and writer Brian Larsen describes the process of doing Smash and Grab. Those feelings of monotony, lack of accomplishment, and eventual freedom can be transposed to the feelings of the two titular robots on this Pixar short film; the second from their SparkShorts initiative.
Smash and Grab follows the titular robots, who are forced to continuously work inside the engine of a futuristic train, all while being tethered to the machine, unable to move freely and even "high five" themselves. However, much like Larsen did when making this short in order to "break free" and feel "fulfilled", Smash and Grab will try to find a way to do so.
I really enjoyed the creativity and animation from this short. The energy and pace of the short is good, and the futuristic/art deco look to the structures and the robots looks really cool. For how "robotic" they look, there's a charm to their interactions that makes it easy to root for them as they strive for freedom and breaking out from routine. So hey, if it worked for Smash and Grab, and it worked for Larsen, it should work for you.
Grade: 3.5
FLOAT
(2019, Rubio)
https://i.imgur.com/FFGGjG5.jpg
"Why can't you just be normal?!"
Float follows Alex, a young boy that can somehow float; something that his father goes to great lengths to hide in order to shield him from ridicule or obsessive lookers. However, sometimes Alex can't help but float, which sparks his father's desperate scream of anguish with the above quote.
Director/writer Bobby Rubio decided to use his son's autism as an inspiration for this short film. The short is an invitation to parents and people to accept their children for who they are, regardless of any diagnose or condition, or how diverse and different they might be. This is something that hit close to home for me, which has me struggling on how much to write here.
But I will rather keep it simple and not that personal. Regardless of how much it hit me, I still felt the short needed a bit more to close things up. That small quibble aside, I think this is a really creative and powerful way to put that message of acceptance out. There's no such thing as "normal", and we all should do our best to love our kids without reserves, and let them "float".
Grade: 4
NONA
(2021, Gonzales)
https://i.imgur.com/jfcNxmC.jpg
"I’ve taken too much time on this and I can’t get it to work; I just dug myself in a deeper hole. We need to stop. I like the other version, [and] I need to tell the team."
That's how writer and director Louis Gonzales describes a crucial moment in the development of his short film, Nona. Developed during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, while working remotely, Gonzales struggled with the project as it went through several drafts, changes, and rewrites. However, this is a wrestling match that he ended up winning in the end.
Nona follows the titular grandmother (Wilma Bonet), a huge wrestling fan, who is just preparing to watch her favorite wrestling event. As she's "turning off the world" to focus on the show, her granddaughter is unexpectedly dropped at her apartment, forcing her to choose between her beloved wrestling show and her family.
There really isn't much to the short. It's very simple and cute. Apparently, the biggest conflict between Gonzales and his team was in how "neglectful" the grandmother should be with her granddaughter, and how "confrontational" should she be as a result. After all, Gonzales jokingly describes the two characters as "opponents" in an interview.
Much like the "wrestling" event depicted in the short, and the "wrestling" between grandmother and granddaughter, Gonzales had to "wrestle" with many obstacles to get to where he wanted. From creative differences with his team, to the struggles of working remotely. It's nice to see he was able to work with it long enough to come up with a version he was satisfied with. It's probably my least favorite of these Pixar SparkShorts, but it's still a charming one.
Grade: 3
TWENTY SOMETHING
(2021, Corbin)
https://i.imgur.com/7VCAazB.jpg
"Ever since I became an adult, everything's been a mess. I don't know what I'm doing. And I'm worried I never will."
Twenty Something follows Gia, as she deals with the insecurities of becoming an adult on her 21st birthday. When she goes to a club to celebrate with her older sister Nicole, Gia personifies her feelings in the form of three children of 16, 10, and 1 year old hiding inside a trenchcoat.
Maybe I'm spoiling the twist, since the short starts as we see the "three girls" struggling to be inconspicuous at the club, making you think they ran out. It is in the last act that it is revealed that this is indeed a "twenty something" trying to get a grip on herself. Regardless, I thought it was a clever way to visualize the pains of "adulting" as some of the things we go through might make us feel like we're reverting to our previous "child selves".
The above quote is the realization that Gia comes to in those last minutes, and as harsh as it might sound, it's a realization that I came to several years ago. The fact that as much as we pretend to have a grip on things as adults, the fact is that none of us knows what we're doing and that we're all essentially "wingin' it" through life, just like every generation before us. What's left for us to do is to "get better at it", as Nicole tells Gia, and enjoy the ride.
Twenty Something is probably one of the most adult-oriented of these Pixar SparkShorts, which I thought was refreshing. The 2D animation is pretty cool and, like I said, the way to tell this story was creative and cool. Maybe as adults, we don't know what we're doing, but as far as this short goes, director/writer Apthon Corbin surely knows what she's doing.
Grade: 3.5
THE MYSTERY OF GREEN HILL
(2017, Černić)
A film from Croatia
https://i.imgur.com/xMW8oiT.jpg
"Some are lucky with fish, some are lucky with thieves."
It is the '60s and a rag-tag group of friends set out to uncover a mystery in their home town! If this sounds like probably a dozen of films and TV shows, it is because there are a dozen of films and TV shows with a similar premise. Change the '60s to the '80s and you have Stand by Me, The Goonies, It, and more recently Stranger Things and It. Why? Probably because this formula lends itself to likable characters and an intriguing plot, and this film is no exception.
Set in Croatia, The Mystery of Green Hill follows a group of five friends as they set out to investigate a series of burglaries in their rural home town of Green Hill. As is usual, the five kids fit the typical stereotypes: there's the main kid, Koko (Marko Tocilj), there's the romantic one, the "nerdy" one (big glasses and all), the cynical one, and the "fat" one. Fortunately, the five actors have a solid chemistry, and although none of them are bad actors, it anyway compensates for whatever they may lack in acting talent.
The story about the burglaries is intriguing, and so are the ways the kids go to try to solve it. However, the pace is a bit off, as it juggles the main story with some brief subplots about the kid's relatives, as well as their daily mingling as they hang out around town or in the lake fishing (hence the above quote as they have fun fishing). There is a bit of a payoff with these subplots in the end, but I think the execution in the middle could've been better. Overall, the direction is pretty solid and the film is entertaining, even if feels a bit generic.
I found out later that this was based on a set of children/teen novels from writer Ivan Kušan. He ended up writing several others with the same characters, primarily Koko. Two of these were actually adapted in 2011 and 2013 by his own son, Daniel. Both films feature the main kid dealing with some kind of mystery, and were successfully received in Croatia. You know, some are lucky with fish, some are lucky with thieves, some are lucky with mystery novels for children/teens.
Grade: 3
MATAR A UN MUERTO
(2019, Giménez)
A film from Paraguay
https://i.imgur.com/5ZAbeZN.jpg
"Those that come here must be buried. We know that's how it has to be."
That's the principle by which Pastor and Dionisio (Ever Enciso and Aníbal Ortíz) live by. Their job is to bury the bodies of political victims of the 1978 dictatorship in Paraguay. But when one of these "bodies" turns up not as "dead" as he should be, Pastor and Dionisio must figure out whether to follow their rules and protect both their lives or follow their conscience endangering all three in the aptly titled drama, Killing the Dead (or Matar a un Muerto).
Directed by Hugo Giménez, this was Paraguay's submission for the Academy Awards in 2020, and you can easily see why. Matar a un Muerto is gorgeously shot and directed, taking a lot of advantage of its rural setting, the vegetation, and the resulting lights and shadows. Giménez does a great job of putting his actors in places where these natural elements either hide them or highlight them, depending on their situation.
The film features dialogue in Spanish and in Guaraní, a native language of the region. Unfortunately, I realized late that the version had none of these native language, substituting it with some not-so-good dubbing. Because of that, I felt that Enciso's performance felt a bit forced, but judging from some clips I saw on the trailer, where he speaks Guaraní, it seems it was a result of the dubbing.
But putting his vocal performances aside, both Enciso and Ortíz do a great job of conveying the moral dilemma that their characters find themselves in with their expressions and body language. However, even though the focus should be them, I wish the character of the surviving victim (Jorge Román) had been fleshed out a bit more. As it is, he feels more like a plot device than an actual character.
Finally, not only is the pace of the film on the slow side, but it lacks a true climatic moment to heighten the end result. There is some tension in the last act as the two men are visited by a superior, but it never really feels like the rhythm spikes too much. Regardless of that, Matar a un Muerto is a contemplative drama that looks at the far reaching consequences of the ruthlessness of those above, and how willing we might be to just go with the flow and bury what needs to be buried, instead of standing up for what's right.
Grade: 3.5
Here's my summary for MAY 2023:
A film from the recent Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time whose ranking includes the number 5: Casablanca (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2390172-casablanca.html) (#65)
A film mostly set on a train (Nat'l Train Day, May 13): The Train (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2389453-the_train.html) (1964)
A film from the 1950s: I Confess (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2389298-i_confess.html)
A film from Croatia (Statehood Day, May 30): The Mystery of Green Hill (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2391017-the_mystery_of_green_hill.html)
A film from Paraguay (Independence Day, May 14-15): Matar un Muerto (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2391195-killing_the_dead.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5K7cOHoay2mZusSLezBOY0Qxh8a.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/bzgPLB7efMohled42PIn6CcOTnO.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5IYyJetEctAypFYIffqx55PXTPT.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/p51NCuJ2qM3ihiZXZu085HtFHHi.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/2cyy2O6NFdxuHCB0mO8oaRgPS6D.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
MCU Films: Eternals (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2387598-eternals.html), Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2389481-guardians_of_the_galaxy_vol._2.html) (rewatch)
Pixar animated shorts: Purl (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2389348-purl.html), Smash and Grab (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2390324-smash_and_grab.html), Float (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2390330-float.html), Nona (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2390483-nona.html), Twenty-Something (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2390795-twenty_something.html)
Other films: Passage of Venus (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2386786#post2386786)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/lFByFSLV5WDJEv3KabbdAF959F2.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/y4MBh0EjBlMuOzv9axM4qJlmhzz.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/A8to7TlVMBwMuDgi2DJ9rVJsobE.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/bsDQdjuGAhj6JrmCKVBFTUBeIrb.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/mgwObpU1NCXfPqF7ZaTpi80mxsF.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/jWlFOOpijBeNMws7KwtFBB79v2S.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zLaGPqNxhkxkzEqPd6hb58FB8t4.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/XWPDZzK7N2WQcejI8W96IxZEeP.jpg
Not counting rewatches, my favorite first-time watch was John Frankenheimer's The Train. A great film!
My least favorite was probably Eternals, but I don't think it was nearly as bad as people make it to be.
For anybody that follows The Movie Loot, here is our latest episode: The Hidden Loot, 2023 version. In this episode, me and my friend Justin (from The Film Effect Podcast) talk about "hidden gems" and little known films, and close the episode sharing a batch of five films we feel should be seen by more people. Check it out!
The Movie Loot 84: The Hidden Loot (with Justin from The Film Effect Podcast) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/12941837-the-movie-loot-84-the-hidden-loot-with-justin-from-the-film-effect-podcast.mp3?download=true)
Look for it also on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/6vAnvSneLUIKOXxgEfB48d?si=1469455ba53a4f5e), Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMjk0MTgzNw?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwiI-63l3sH_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQNg), etc.
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN
(2012, Webb)
https://i.imgur.com/VVCUbIU.png
"Ever since you were a little boy, you've been living with so many unresolved things. Well, take it from an old man. Those things send us down a road... they make us who we are."
In May 3, 2002, Marvel and Sony released Spider-Man to much critical acclaim, eventually spawning two sequels. I will apologize in advance, but it is impossible for me to talk about The Amazing Spider-Man without looking back to these films. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man was the first time that the superhero, created in 1962, appeared on screen in an official feature film, but most importantly, it was the first Spider-Man film I saw.
20 years later, and we've seen the release of 8 live-action Spider-Man feature films and two animated ones, all within roughly four separate series, or "universes" (Raimi, Webb, Watts/MCU, etc.) That is more films than they've made Batman or Superman films within similar spans. Why? It is almost as if Sony was in a quest to find something that they feel wasn't achieved by the Raimi series or the Webb series, and maybe even the Watts/MCU series.
Maybe that's why I pushed back a bit when this came out, not seeing it until last week. I just wasn't interested in seeing another take of the character less than 5 years after the last Raimi film. Not because of any particular allegiance I felt to that series, but just because it felt like walking down the same road again. But, being the weird completist that I am, as I am getting ready to watch Spider-Man: No Way Home, I decided to finally give this a shot and close the Spider-Man cinematic circle, so to speak.
The Amazing Spider-Man follows Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) as he tries to juggle his newfound spider-powers with his regular life as a high school teenager. This is complicated by the mysterious disappearance of his father years before, who was employed by Oscorp to develop a regenerative serum along with Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans). Caught in the crossfire of his life are his Uncle Ben and Aunt May (Martin Sheen and Sally Field) as well as his love interest, Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone).
So it was indeed like walking down that same road again. The film goes through the already known origin story of Peter being bitten by a genetically enhanced spider while "allowing" the murder of his uncle at the hands of a nameless burglar. Been there, done that. Most of the time it feels as if the journey through these familiar road was led by a guide who was in a hurry, going through a list of Spider-Man checkboxes to cover ("there he is, bitten by the spider... oh, and there he is, Uncle Ben is shot"). As a result, most of these moments feel neutered and with little room to breathe.
Where the film ends up shining is when it manages to lean into the characters of Peter and Gwen, and their interactions together. Even if at times it feels like a bit of a stretch to see them as high schoolers, Garfield and Stone have an undeniable chemistry and they are both great in their roles. Most of the cast is solid as well and they would work better, if only their characters were given the space to grow instead of using them as moving pieces for the potential sequels.
Marc Webb's direction is competent, the special effects are decent, and again, the performances of the two lead characters elevate the rehashed material above what one would expect. Even though most of what I've written feels negative, I don't regret having walked down this road, even if there wasn't a lot of new things to see. Maybe for someone who hasn't experienced the Raimi films first, the journey will feel significantly better.
Grade: 3
THE FINAL DESTINATION
(2009, Ellis)
https://i.imgur.com/yissKtt.png
"Don't you see? This is where I was supposed to be in the first place, not that stupid race. I was meant to see this movie."
That is the defiant claim of Janet to take control of his life, right before a freaky explosion at the movie theater ends up fatally impaling her. But that's what we should expect from a Final Destination film; witty soundbites followed by the freaky deaths of those that were supposed to die, in this case, in a bizarre car crash at an auto race as "Death" recoups them one by one.
This fourth installment in the popular franchise focuses on Nick (Bobby Campo) who has a vision of the car crash minutes before it happens, which prompts him to flee the stands with his friends (as well as a handful of others that follow). But of course, as we know from this franchise and as it is told by Nick himself later, "sooner or later... you're up."
This is a franchise that, although it's never at the top of my lists of anything, I always have fun with. I had already read this was the weakest one, so I didn't really have a lot of expectations other than to see freaky kills; because if this franchise has taught me anything is that nobody really cares about the characters, but rather about how and when they die. The real star of these films are the Rube-Goldberg-like contrivances that lead to each character's death.
Unfortunately, most of the deaths here feel a bit uninspired, but also hampered by bad CGI and cheap 3-D effects. In addition, the absence of Tony Todd as the mysterious coroner/Grim Reaper means that the characters reasoning of what's happening has to be reduced to them "googling" some stuff and deducing the rest through a weaksauce expository dialogue.
Regardless of its flaws, the film still manages to milk some fun out of its premise. For some reason, I had only seen the first two back in the day, but have been catching up with the rest lately in order to finish the series. This one does feel a bit detached from the others and it is indeed the weakest, but I guess this is where I was supposed to be in the first place: I was meant to see this movie.
Grade: 2.5
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2
(2014, Webb)
https://i.imgur.com/s2T9kSl.png
"You're Spider-Man, and I love that. But I love Peter Parker more."
That's Gwen Stacey's love proclamation to boyfriend/superhero Peter (Andrew Garfield) during the first half of this film. Following up Marc Webb's 2012 film, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 follows Parker as he struggles with his superhero "duties", as well as the burden of trying and wanting to protect those around him; from Stacey (Emma Stone) to his childhood friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan). Oh, and there's also the geek-turned-supervillain Electro (Jamie Foxx) and the Russian criminal that turns into Rhino (Paul Giamatti).
If that sounds like a lot, it's because it is. For some reason, Marc Webb decides to cram as much as he can into the 2+ hours runtime and the results are, to say the least, a mess. The abrupt and clumsy introduction of Harry into the story is one of the worst offenders. If I complained that the first film felt like "going through a list of Spider-Man checkboxes to cover", this one amps that up to the max. Most people know what will happen with Harry, and most people probably know what will happen with Gwen, so it's all a matter of rushing through these checkpoints just because.
But then there's also Electro, who is the main villain for the first half of the film and whose motivations are as flimsy as the film's script, and finally Rhino, who I honestly don't know what the hell is doing here (spoiler, he's only in the last 5 minutes). Then there are some corporate machinations surrounding Oscorp and it's VP (Colm Feore), and also their connections to Peter's father, I tell you, it's a lot and just like the first film, it all feels like moving pieces for potential sequels, instead of actual characters and stories.
The saving grace once again is in the performances of Garfield and Stone. Once again, their chemistry shines and their relationship serves as an anchor to the messy story. Same can be said about some solid moments between Peter and Aunt May (Sally Field). It is in these personal and intimate moments that the film and its actors excel. Moments when they are allowed to be humans and not indestructible superheroes, ciphers, or plot devices.
That is until they're dragged again into another convoluted CGI bash-a-thon with the villain of the moment, whether it is Electro, Green Goblin, or Rhino. In these moments, I can't help but feel like Gwen, pleading to his love, i.e. Peter/Garfield: You're Spider-Man... but I love Peter Parker more.
Grade: 2
FINAL DESTINATION 5
(2011, Quale)
https://i.imgur.com/oPB4aDt.jpg
"A lucky few survive a disaster. And then one by one... death comes for them all. You changed things on that bridge. There's a wrinkle in reality. And that wrinkle is you."
Benjamin Franklin famously wrote "in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes." I've read director Guillermo del Toro say that we "walk life side-by-side with death" and that "everybody in this planet boarded a train that was... final destination: Death". But aside of being certain for all of us, is it set? That is the premise that the films in the Final Destination franchise explores; can we cheat death and live for a while longer? Based on all five films, it seems not.
Like all four films before it, Final Destination 5 follows a group of friends and co-workers that end up surviving a deadly bridge collapse when Sam (Nicholas D'Agosto) has a vision about it. But as it's usual in these films, "death comes for them all" to fix those "wrinkles" and set things straight again.
Like I said when I wrote about the fourth part last week, this is a franchise that knows how to balance horror and fun in a very twisted way, but without feeling as abrasive or convoluted as, say, the Saw franchise. As gory and shocking as some deaths might be, there is always a darkly humorous vibe to it all, which comes in part, thanks to the numerous contrivances that lead to each death.
It was nice to see that, after the fourth one which felt a bit stale, the writer and director here still managed to throw a couple of misdirections and surprise us with some of the deaths. Plus, some of them were really gory, surprising, or just cringe-inducing (the eye laser one had me squirming in pain). The opening bridge collapse scene was also well executed, and it was nice to see the return of Tony Todd as the mysterious "seer".
But more important, I think that the filmmakers succeeded in making us care about the characters. The story about the paper company, the impact that the bridge collapse has in the business and its employees, plus the subplot of Sam wanting to move to Paris for a chef internship add a nice and effective subtext to everything. Plus, that last bit leads to a wicked twist that, even though I knew, still works.
After the average fourth part, it was nice to see the franchise bounce back with a final installment that knew how to balance gore and humor with decent characters, while also looping back to the first installment in a way that feels organic and meant to be. Kinda like straightening a wrinkle.
Grade: 3.5
Just for fun, here is my ranking of the franchise...
Final Destination (haven't seen it in a long time, though)
Final Destination 5
Final Destination 2
Final Destination 3
The Final Destination
I also put out this Twitter poll a couple of days ago, in case anybody wants to vote :laugh: There's still a couple of hours left in it
https://twitter.com/ThiefCGT/status/1673138195008049152
SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME
(2021, Watts)
https://i.imgur.com/038Iz5S.jpg
"My Aunt May taught me that everyone deserves a second chance. That's why I'm here."
That's the stance from Peter Parker (Tom Holland) as he vows to help a group of troubled characters in this second sequel to the MCU Spider-Man films. Regardless of how things would've gone for them, Parker is determined to give these characters a "second chance" and help them. That's why he's here. But in true meta way, the film ends up feeling like a second (or third?) chance also for a lot of the peripheral cast and crew members of this franchise, as well as their fans.
Sam Raimi's Spider-Man starring Tobey Maguire came out in 2002, sparking a new era in comic book films (along with 2000's X-Men). The second sequel, however, wasn't that well received and killed any chances for a fourth film. Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man came out in 2012, and despite some praise for Andrew Garfield's performance as Peter Parker, the reception was mostly lukewarm, or in the case of the sequel, just plain bad prompting Sony to strike out any plans for a third film in that series.
Marvel successfully brought back the "friendly neighborhood" as part of their Marvel Cinematic Universe in 2017 with Holland as the "web slinger". No Way Home, the second sequel in that series, follows Peter Parker (Holland) as he's trying to find some sense of normalcy after being far from home, snapped out of existence by Thanos, and trying to "get back home again". However, when his identity is revealed to the whole world, affecting the lives of his girlfriend MJ (Zendaya) and his best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon), Peter tries desperately to give them a "second chance".
How? Well, he asks Dr. Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) for help. Unfortunately, his insecurities lead to a botched spell, which results in the visit from several characters from "Spider-Man's past" trying to get a "second chance" at finishing their enemy. Unless you've been living under a rock for the past years, you know what (or who) I'm talking about, which is why, like I said before, this film feels like a "second chance" to pretty much everybody involved.
I'm still conflicted about my feelings on this film. There are some clever aspects to its meta approach and it was certainly nice to see people like Alfred Molina, Willem Dafoe, Tobey Maguire, and Andrew Garfield take another shot at their characters. However, it still can't help but feel like a heavy-handed wink, wink to the audience; especially when you have characters throwing meme-like lines ("I'm something of a scientist myself") just to make us chuckle.
To complicate things, the attempt to bring back these retro villains feels half-baked; from two mostly realized ones in Doctor Octopus and Green Goblin, to Electro (Jamie Foxx) who feels a bit inconsistent and half-assed when compared to the previous incarnation, and finally Sandman and Lizard, both of which feel more like an afterthought. Even though they are still voiced by the actual original actors (Thomas Haden Church and Rhys Ifans), the fact that they are pretty much CGI creations makes the whole thing feel like an incomplete project, with the studio saying "we already have Molina, Dafoe, and Foxx, so let's just cut corners with these two".
Despite my reservations and issues, the film still manages to give us several great moments of movie magic. There is a conversation in a rooftop between the three Peter Parkers as they exchange their respective burdens that is quite powerful. In addition, the overall chemistry between Holland, Tobey Maguire, and Andrew Garfield is genius, and their moments together are full of earnest charm. There are also a couple of cleverly executed climatic moments that give some of these characters a "second chance" at redemption.
I'm still not sure what to think about the overall logistics of the story, Holland's motivations and the whole "save the villains" premise. Despite that, Spider-Man: No Way Home is mostly a fun experience packed with some well-thought use of past characters and solid action. I wish they would've been able to extend that cleverness and those good thoughts to wrap the whole present, but if they continue the story, I'm willing to give them a second (or third?) chance.
Grade: 3.5
AMBUSH
(2001, Frankenheimer)
https://i.imgur.com/MLb0am2.png
"Listen carefully. It's going to happen very quickly. If you deviate from my instructions, we will open fire."
Ambush follows an unnamed driver (Clive Owen) as he is transporting an old man (Tomas Milian). As the title and the above quote implies, they are ambushed on a remote road by a van full of armed men determined to capture the old man as they claim he is the courier for "2 million dollars in stolen, uncut diamonds". Will the driver deviate from their instructions or will he follow them?
This is the fourth of these BMW short films dubbed The Hire that I see, but it's actually the first from the series. It is directed by John Frankenheimer and it features one of the things that he's been known for: thrilling car chases (see Ronin). I think it's safe to say that the driver does deviate from the instructions and tries to make a way out of this ambush, which puts him face to face with incoming trucks, road blocks, and whatnot.
Owen and Milian are pretty good but this is not a performance or character-driven short. This is purely done for the thrill of the ambush and the chase and Frankenheimer does a great job keeping the direction tight and concise. Everything does happen very quickly and they do open fire, but you should listen carefully and follow my instructions: watch this, because it's short and it's a lot of fun.
Grade: 4
CHOSEN
(2001, Lee)
https://i.imgur.com/DZNS0K9.png
"We are very grateful. Soon you will see the important role you played in his life."
Some people believe we are put in certain places, moments, situations with a special purpose. That we all have important roles to play in other people's lives. That belief permeates within the aptly titled Chosen, another BMW short film from The Hire series. This time, our nameless driver (Owen) is "chosen" to drive an Asian boy (Mason Lee) who is believed to be "chosen" for some holy task by the monks protecting him. Of course, that means our driver won't have an easy task ahead of him while driving him from the docks to a safe house.
As the driver has to evade a group of kidnappers around the docks, director Ang Lee combines the use of some classical music with an almost operatic movement of the cars through the cargo containers. Considering the short has almost no dialogue, it is nice to see the way Lee uses a combination of music, clever direction, editing, silences, and glances between the driver and the boy to build a simple story. There are also a couple of neat twists and touches in the end that I found to be effective and well executed.
Seeing this right after Ambush, directed by John Frankenheimer, it's interesting to see the approach that both directors take to a similar premise (drive a character from A to B) and still have both work on different levels. Frankenheimer going for a more adrenaline-filled intense approach, while Lee goes for a more operatic and meditative one that ends up being just as thrilling. Seems like Lee was perfectly "chosen" for this role and for that, we are very grateful.
Grade: 3.5
STAR
(2001, Ritchie)
https://i.imgur.com/X2UM4HL.jpg
"Show her the sights. Give her *everything* I've paid you for; breakfast, lunch, and dinner."
Star is yet another BMW short film, where our unnamed driver (Clive Owen) has to drive someone from A to B. This time, the passenger is a spoiled singer played by Madonna (at the time married to the director of the short, Guy Ritchie). So as the singer berates everyone around her, including our driver, he is determined to "show her the sights".
This is another perfect example of how each of these short films are perfect capsules of their respective directors because this is pure Ritchie. From an opening, fourth-wall breaking monologue by the driver to the combination of some fast-paced cuts and slow-motion direction, all the while peppered with Ritchie's style of humor.
That doesn't sound too bad, but seeing this after Ambush and Chosen felt a bit jarring. This is the sixth short film I've seen from the series, and even though they all carry the distinctive style of their directors, this is the only one so far that doesn't seem to really fit in terms of tone, style, and even the behavior of the driver. It sure is fun as Ritchie shows us the sights of who he is, but it's far from a star in my book.
Grade: 2.5
Here's my summary for JUNE 2023:
Yet another month that I wasn't able to do my usual challenge for various personal and logistical reasons. Still, I caught up with a couple of franchises and film series I was looking forward to, so here it is:
Final Destination series: The Final Destination (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2394527-the_final_destination.html), Final Destination 5 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2395082-final_destination_5.html)
Spider-Man films: The Amazing Spider-Man (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2394217-the_amazing_spider-man.html), The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2394631-the_amazing_spider-man_2.html), Spider-Man: No Way Home (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2396052-spider-man_no_way_home.html)
The Hire BMW shorts: Ambush (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2397976-ambush.html), Chosen (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2398044-chosen.html), Star (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2398054-star.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5vxXrr1MqGsT4NNeRITpfDnl4Rq.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/Akx1Po4ZLetOWfYJhQf75tbhTtK.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/jIfkQNARYyERqRAq1p1c8xgePp4.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/c3e9e18SSlvFd1cQaGmUj5tqL5P.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5weKu49pzJCt06OPpjvT80efnQj.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zz4Dz5GWKSLuyLprB4ZT7uhoG8a.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/jOJ7B0GZTlEeavT5l9Zvyox6WiD.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/e9qcNtRSEgoYVrbns0pHInjuvyN.jpg
Nothing really spectacular, but some fun watches in there. That Ambush short was a really good one, but I also won't deny I had a lot of fun with Final Destination 5.
My least favorite was probably The Amazing Spider-Man 2, which was a mess, and that Star short with Madonna.
VERTIGO
(1958, HItchcock)
https://i.imgur.com/qQYWJNr.png
"One doesn't often get a second chance. I want to stop being haunted. You're my second chance, Judy. You're my second chance."
Vertigo follows retiring detective Johnny "Scottie" Ferguson (James Stewart) as he copes with bouts of vertigo and acrophobia following a tragic accident at work. But when an old college friend asks him to tail his wife Madeleine (Kim Novak), Scottie is forced to come face to face with everything that haunts him if he wants to move forward.
There is much to be said about Scottie's "condition" and the ways that Hitchcock uses to heighten his feelings of "vertigo" and how much he is affected by it. Scottie is haunted from the beginning of the film. What follows is the many ways that he tries to get another chance, a chance to redeem himself and prove he can save someone.
Following Madeleine gives Scottie that chance, or at least that's what he thinks. The plot puts him in an intricate web of deception and lies in which he finds himself in both sides. The truth is that his "vertigo" is nothing more than a manifestation of the guilt and trauma he's suffering for not being able to save a fellow officer; something that he's clearly not been able to get past.
Known as the Master of Suspense, Hitchcock started to make a name for himself in the 1920s and 1930s with some neat, little thrillers. Regardless of their quality, most of them are quite superficial and light in their approach. But after coming to the US in 1940, he started to dive more into the psychology of his characters. Shadow of a Doubt or Strangers on a Train are examples of this.
Vertigo is probably the peak of this trend and it has been my favorite Hitchcock for a while. The film is a disturbing study in obsession and trauma, and the way that the director manages to sweep the rug from under our feet regarding our main character is quite something. Kudos also to Stewart, who rose up to the task of playing a mentally disturbed men in a way that he had never done before.
Allegedly Hitchcock wasn't happy with the Stewart's performance, but I think he was perfect. The way that we see his character slowly devolve in the last act is great, and the implications of his actions are disturbing, to say the least. Seen this film a dozen times, and I think it bothers me more now than it did back then.
Grade: 5
MORTAL KOMBAT
(2021, McQuoid)
A film with a title that starts with the letters M or N • A film based on a video game
https://i.imgur.com/0uDgDwH.jpg
"There are not many of us with the marking left, so you must train harder and fast. Because if you fail to discover your inner power, you will never defeat your opponent. They will ravage everything you hold dear. There will be no mercy. You must fight without question."
In 1992, the first Mortal Kombat video game burst into existence blowing the heads out of everyone with its notorious graphic violence; hearts were ripped from chests, spines were pulled from necks, and losers were burned to ashes. You had to have a certain skill to remember and perform these "fatalities", but since I didn't have *it*, I was satisfied with just standing aside and watch others do the brutal deeds.
This penchant for violence and how a lot of people were happy enough with just watching it would make anybody think that the franchise was tailor-made for a film adaptation, which undoubtedly came in 1995. Despite mixed reviews, the film was a box office hit at the moment spawning a sequel that most critics hold as one of the worst films ever made. Some animated efforts aside, the franchise had remained untouched film-wise... until 2021!
Like the game, Mortal Kombat follows a group of characters that find themselves somehow in the midst of a battle between multiple otherwordly realms, all striving for control of each other through the titular tournament ("the word 'combat' isn't even spelled right.") In the middle of it all is Cole Young (Lewis Tan), a washed up MMA fighter and non-game character that has just realized he is the descendant of a legendary fighter and the subject of a prophecy.
But as is usual with these adaptations, it is all just an excuse to introduce the ensemble of characters that will beat the s-hit out of each other. Aside from Cole, we have Sonya and Jax (Jessica McNamee and Mehcad Brooks), two Special Forces agents investigating the existence of the tournament, and Kano (Josh Lawson), an Australian mercenary they've been interrogating about it and who carries a dragon mark in his body that apparently identifies the tournament fighters.
The truth is that I'm struggling to write these brief synopsis to make it sound coherent, because the film is just shock-full of clumsy character introductions, a weak script, and some mediocre performances. There also seems to be a divide between the two main subplots: that of Cole stumbling upon the Mortal Kombat tournament, and the story of his lineage which introduces to us the popular characters of Scorpion and Sub-Zero (Hiroyuki Sanada and Joe Taslim) while bookending the film.
I found most of the moments between these two characters to be effective and well executed. But once the film has to shift to having characters clumsily utter popular "video game lines" like "FATALITY!" all while they try to find some "hidden power" within them, it just feels awkward and forced. Lawson as Kano was a breath of fresh air among the main performances. His scenery-chewing and fun banter gave his moments on screen a jolt of life.
But the truth is that, much like I just stood aside at the arcade to watch these characters beat the s-hit out of each other, most people that tune into this will be looking for the violence and in that aspect, the film delivers. Much like the video game, hearts are ripped from chests, heads are smashed, characters are cut in half, and losers are burned to ashes. So if that's what you're looking for, maybe this is for you.
Grade: 2
MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - FALLOUT
(2018, McQuarrie)
A film with a title that starts with the letters M or N
https://i.imgur.com/5yRVhmq.jpg
"You had a terrible choice to make in Berlin: one life over millions. And now the world is at risk."
When the original Mission: Impossible opened back in 1996, IMF lead agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) found himself alone and disavowed, his whole team strategically eliminated by someone they were supposed to trust. Makes sense that as a result, Hunt would go out of his way to protect his teammates at all costs, even if it is "one life over millions"; and that is precisely the predicament in which he finds himself in this sixth installment of the popular franchise.
Mission: Impossible - Fallout has Hunt and his team trying to locate a trio of plutonium cores that were lost in a botched handoff, all because Ethan chose to protect his friends. Because of this, he's tacked on with CIA agent Augustus Walker (Henry Cavill) to make sure that everything runs smoothly. But since this is "mission impossible", things won't necessarily go their way as they are once again put in the path of captured anarchist Solomon Lane (Sean Harris), who might still have a couple of tricks under his sleeve.
All this and more just serve to put Ethan and his team in all kinds of predicaments. Driving away from assassins and mercenaries through the streets of Paris, hiding from dirty agents in a London safe house, defusing nuclear bombs in Kashmir. But if there's one constant all through is Hunt's determination to protect those that he cares for, maybe as a way to atone for those that he couldn't protect back in 1996.
This is something that has become a staple in the franchise since Mission: Impossible III; the attempts to turn Ethan into a burdened human being as opposed to an "uber-cool" superhero. This is not James Bond, but rather a real person that feels and suffers for those around him, and Cruise does a great job portraying that emotional weight. Even though you see him running and jumping and surviving insurmountable odds, you never stop believing he is a vulnerable human being.
Back for the ride once again are Luther Stickell, Benji Dunn, and Ilsa Faust (Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, and Rebecca Ferguson), but it is Hunt's pairing with Walker that electrifies the screen with friction, tension, doubts, and why not? some light humor. Cavill definitely owns the role as he plays Walker as an uptight, imposing, and ambigous partner, all in one super-package.
This was my second time watching the film, mostly for a guest appearance at a friend's podcast, but I didn't mind it at all. As a matter of fact, I think I enjoyed it and appreciated it more this time around. From the great performances and chemistry of the cast, to the insane action setpieces, it's always a delight to know that even though the world is at risk, Ethan Hunt is out there to make the terrible choices we can't.
Grade: 4.5
UNCLE JOSH AT THE MOVING PICTURE SHOW
(1902, Porter)
https://i.imgur.com/8DzOn3E.jpg
"Cinema should make you forget you are sitting in a theater."
The above is a quote from director Roman Polanski, regarding the goals of cinema. The theater experience should make you feel like you are *inside* the movie, immersed in what's happening; whether it is the sound and rumble of an incoming train, the sights and feelings of an alien world, or the thrill and adrenaline of jumping from a cliff.
Released in 1902, Uncle Josh at the Moving Picture Show plays with that premise as we follow the titular character (Charles Manley) as he attends a "moving picture show". But as soon as the camera starts rolling, Uncle Josh forgets he's sitting in a theater as he experiences the joy of a can-can dance, the dread of an incoming train, and the jealousy towards a kissing couple which drives him to tear up the screen.
At 2 minutes, there isn't much else to it, but it is still a pretty neat slice of meta before the word was ever invented; a testament to the aspirations and goals of cinema. Maybe not to tear the screen, but hopefully to make us forget that we're sitting in a theater.
Grade: N/A
NOPE
(2022, Peele)
A film about aliens or alien abductions
https://i.imgur.com/hkdh8Tk.jpg
"This dream you're chasing, the one where you end up at the top of the mountain, all eyes on you, it's the dream you never wake up from."
Spectacle and fame are at the core of Jordan Peele's latest film. From the enigmatic cold opening set during the recording of a classic sitcom or our initial introduction to the Haywood's as they are pitching their services as horse handlers for a movie all the way to the very climax of the film where the dream of fame ends up being a blessing or a curse to some of the characters; the one you never wake up from.
Nope follows siblings OJ and Emerald (Daniel Kaluuya and Keke Palmer), the aforementioned horse handlers, as they struggle to make ends meet. That is until some weird occurrences and sightings of an alleged UFO presents an opportunity for them to gain both fame and fortune. But chasing that dream can be the reason for them to never wake up again.
There is something about Peele's work that still amazes me on this, his third film. It's a confidence and assuredness in his direction that makes you feel at ease with his work; at least in terms of the craft because the premise is still as eerie and intriguing as with his previous works. No matter the shot, you get the feeling that Peele knows what he's doing and that there is purpose in everything you see on the screen.
The story does get a bit out of his hands, though, at least for a bit. The pace is a bit patchy towards the second act and it does feel like the execution of some of its sublots isn't as effective as it could've been. Thankfully, aside from a skilled directorial hand, Peele can also count in a helluva talented cast to smooth any slight weakness the story might have. Kaluuya continues to impress with every film, but Palmer is a scene-stealer.
Steven Yeun is also great, although his subplot is one where I feel the integration with the rest could've been better. He's one of those characters that I wish I could've read or seen more of. The cast is rounded out by Brandon Perea and Michael Wincott as the two acquaintances hired by the Haywood's to help them record and document these "UFO" sightings.
And that is the common denominator through all these characters; their chase of the dream. To have a successful business, to make it big in the Hollywood system, to capture something that people have never seen and live to share it. Spectacle and fame. With Nope being his third film, Jordan Peele surely seems to be chasing that dream hard. Not sure if he'll ever "wake up" from it, but right now, he's at the top of the mountain, and all eyes are on him.
Grade: 3.5
BROOKLYN BRIDGE
(1981, Burns)
A film from Ken Burns
https://i.imgur.com/Q1ftuwI.jpg
"Isn't it marvelous? that it was built by people like you and I? people like... we would like to be, at least?"
Brooklyn Bridge chronicles the design, construction, and legacy of the titular bridge. It is the directorial debut of popular documentarian Ken Burns, who takes a traditional but insightful approach to the film about this "marvelous" bridge "built by people".
Opened in 1883, the Brooklyn Bridge was one of the first main bridges to connect Manhattan with the other New York boroughs. However, it's construction was not without its issues, which went from the death of its designer John Roebling, the illness of his son, successor, and chief engineer Washington, but also to the risky logistics of its erection.
Featuring interviews and commentaries from architects, writers, and regular New Yorkers, Brooklyn Bridge is a breezy and interesting journey through the drive of those that not only wanted to build something to connect, but also of those that wanted to be like them and conveyed that through word, poetry, music, comedy, or just simply by crossing it.
Grade: 3.5
SALUDOS AMIGOS
(1942, Various)
https://i.imgur.com/Lf1p7ju.jpg
"This is what can happen to a big city when a crowd of cartoonists are turned loose."
Saludos Amigos is an anthology film released by Disney during World War II. It is comprised of four different shorts all set in different countries of Latin America (Bolivia, Perú, Chile, Argentina, Brazil) and features characters like Donald Duck, Goofy, as well as the introduction of José Carioca, a Brazilian parrot.
The film segments are interspersed with brief live-action segments featuring real-life Disney animators as they travel to Latin America and interact with locals to take inspiration for the film. This gives you a bit of an idea of how the segments unfold, which is more as an American's interpretation of Latin American life, than Latin American life itself.
The truth is that the film was commissioned by the US Department of Defense itself as one of many efforts to strengthen ties with Latin America in order to counteract the potential influence of Nazi Germany in the region. This is not inherently bad, but it does show how there have always been ulterior motives behind artistic expressions.
Regardless of the reasons for its inception, the film has its moments. The Pedro segment, which follows a young antropomorphic plane on a dangerous air mail mission, is charming while the final segment, Aquarela do Brasil, is colorful and full of neat music. Unfortunately, there is little to no cohesion between each segment which makes it all feel like what it is: a crowd of cartoonists turned loose.
Grade: 2.5
UNCLE JOSH'S NIGHTMARE
(1902, Porter)
https://i.imgur.com/xxUFD1F.png
"Now I lay me down to sleep. I pray the Lord my soul to keep."
That is the first sentence of a classic children's bedtime prayer. One that is asking for protection from the Lord, and eventually guidance to the soul if Death ends up coming. But even if Death doesn't come, there's still the nightmares to deal with.
Directed by Edwin Porter, Uncle Josh's Nightmare is the first of a "trilogy" of sorts that feature the titular character in different places and situations. This one follows Uncle Josh (Charles Manley) as he tries his best to sleep. That is until a devil-ish presence makes all it can to bother the poor man.
From playing tug-o-war with the bed sheets to disappearing furniture, the short is a showcase of the editing tricks of the early 20th Century. At a little over 2 minutes, it is a breezy and simple watch that sheds some light into the way things were in cinema more than 100 years ago.
Grade: N/A
POWDER KEG
(2001, González Iñárritu)
https://i.imgur.com/Chk3T5z.png
"I've had people wounded on their knees in front of me, begging me to help. You know what I do?... Ah, take the picture. I've never saved anybody... Fifteen wars. Not a single one."
War has been a constant in the world as far as humanity is concerned. Whether it is full-scale war, guerrilla wars, civil wars, or insurgencies, conflicts have been pretty much ever-present in our society. There is a claim that there have only been 26 days of "peace" since 1945, and 268 in the last 3,400 years. I don't know if that claim is real or not, but I wouldn't really bet against it either.
The question of what we do in the face of war, especially when it's something so common in our lives, is part of what fuels this short from Alejandro González Iñárritu. Powder Keg is yet another short film from The Hire series, produced by BMW. In this one, our unnamed driver (Clive Owen) is tasked with taking a wounded war photographer, Harvey Jacobs (Stellan Skarsgård), across the border and out of hostile territory.
Putting aside the reasonings and logistics of this BMW driver being thrown into this scenario – other than promoting the shiny BMW X5 3.0i, now with leather interiors. Perfect for transporting bleeding people! – I found the short to be quite effective. First, you can feel how close it is to González Iñárritu's sensibilities, but second, Skarsgård is great in the role as he transmits the bitterness and regret of Jacobs about what he sees as his inability to do anything in the face of constant war.
Fifteen wars, but he's about to deliver a "powder keg" in the form of evidence of a massacre that might make a difference in the country and maybe lead to a moment of peace. González Iñárritu uses a very frenetic and fast-paced approach with handheld cameras that might get on some people's nerves, but it does succeed as far as conveying the desperation of the situation.
This being the seventh of these short films I see, I can't help but reiterate my respect for everyone involved in terms of allowing such a marketing-heavy tool to tell stories that feel personal and unique to each filmmaker. It does require some level of leniency as far as the logistics of it, but the script and the cast more than make up for it.
Grade: 4
TICKER
(2002, Carnahan)
https://i.imgur.com/gqjYOlL.png
"What would you fall on your sword for? If not this, then what?"
Ticker is the seventh short film from the BMW series The Hire, but the eighth I see. In this one, the driver (Clive Owen) is transporting a man (Don Cheadle) carrying a mysterious briefcase. However, they are relentlessly pursued by a helicopter with armed men determined to stop them which, of course, allows our driver to showcase the BMW Z4 3.0i *wink, wink*
Even though this one's from the "second season", it is interesting that I saw it right after Powder Keg, which was the first one from the "first season". The thing is that they both put the driver into more ludicrous high-stakes situations (rescuing people in war-torn countries) as opposed to just driving people around. This one does feel a bit over-produced, but as far as the action goes, Carnahan's direction is pretty slick and effective.
I do think they stretch the mystery of the suitcase for a bit too long and the reveal wasn't as impactful for me as some of the previous shorts in the series. Still, it was well made with a solid performance from Cheadle. It was also interesting to see a couple of blink-and-you'll-miss-them cameos from the likes of Ray Liotta, Robert Patrick, and Dennis Haysbert.
Grade: 3
THE ESCAPE
(2016, Blonkamp)
https://i.imgur.com/AepVHMY.jpg
"I might be a little rusty right now, but I've been doing this for a long time. I'm very good at it."
Released in 2016, The Escape is the final short from the BMW series The Hire, which features Clive Owen as an unnamed driver, assigned with various tasks. The series started in 2001, continuing on in 2002, and then stopping before this final outing. So, much like the driver character, Owen has been doing this "for a long time" and he's indeed "very good at it".
In The Escape, the driver is tasked with transporting Lily (Dakota Fanning) to an unknown client while escorted by a mercenary called Holt (Jon Bernthal). The thing is that Lily is a clone created by Molecular Genetics whose illegal activities have just been exposed. Their "escape" takes place just as the FBI is raiding the facility.
As they're driving, the subsequent interactions with Lily and the mistreatment of her by Holt seem to force the driver to a moral dilemma, where he decides to dump Holt and take Lily to safety. This, of course, gives him the opportunity to drive a BMW G30 really fast for all our potential customers to see.
Like some of the ones I just reviewed, it might feel a bit silly to have this driver involved in such situations that now extend even into cloning... but as long as the action setpieces are competently done, they're accomplishing what they set out to do. The whole chase is well choreographed, Bernthal and Fanning are great, and Blonkamp shows that he knows what he's doing.
Grade: 3.5
I had a lot of fun watching this series, so why not give anyone that's interested a full ranking?
Ambush (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2397976-ambush.html) (Frankenheimer) - 4
Hostage (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2384811-hostage.html) (Woo) - 4
Powder Keg (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401396-powder_keg.html) (González Iñárritu) - 4
The Follow (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2374439-the_follow.html) (Wong) - 3.5
The Escape (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401442-the_escape.html) (Blonkamp) - 3.5
Chosen (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2398044-chosen.html) (Lee) - 3.5
Ticker (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401412-ticker.html) (Carnahan) - 3.5
Beat the Devil (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2323436-beat_the_devil.html) (Scott) - 3
Star (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2398054-star.html) (Ritchie) - 2.5
Don't lose perspective that these are "glorified car ads", but as far as achieving what they set out to do while also carrying each of the filmmaker's distinctive fingerprint, I think they're pretty much worth a watch.
Forgot to post a couple of updates from the podcast so here goes nothing. My latest Special Episode of The Movie Loot, #18, goes to one of my all-time favorites. In this episode I talk about L.A. Confidential; specifically the final shoot-out, but also some overall themes:
The Movie Loot - Special Episode XVIII (L.A. Confidential) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13220394-the-movie-loot-special-episode-xviii-l-a-confidential.mp3?download=true)
Remember you can also listen on Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-special-episode-xviii-l-a-confidential/id1578191119?i=1000621583877), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/42WbU9OMEhxkrx8CVz4xdl?si=28a767c7114c4e7c), Google Podcasts, and most podcast platforms.
I also had my fifth "assignment" episode with this new format I'm doing for the podcast.
The Movie Loot: The July Assignment (with Darren from Movie Reviews 101) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13304774-the-movie-loot-the-july-assignment-with-darren-from-movie-reviews-101.mp3?download=true)
In this one, me and Darren Lucas, from Movie Reviews 101, joined the loot as we chose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AJYEFFtwvY)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-july-assignment-with-darren/id1578191119?i=1000622590599), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3ZnsIJyyBbMkzoRhnPu9Zw?si=4fb350d56d7042f6), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzMwNDc3NA?sa=X&ved=0CAQQ8qgGahcKEwiIm9OGpLKAAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), or any other.
Here are the criteria we chose for JULY 2023:
A film based on a video game (Nat'l Video Game Day, July 8):
A film with a title that starts with the letters M or N:
A film about aliens or alien abductions (World UFO Day, July 2):
A film from Ken Burns (born July 29):
A film from Argentina (Independence Day, July 9):
LICENSE TO DRIVE
(1988, Beeman)
https://i.imgur.com/u8zZwS0.jpg
"Les, that license in your wallet, that's not an ordinary piece of paper, that is a driver's license, and its not only a driver's license, it's an automobile license, and it's not only an automobile license, it's a license to live, a license to be free, a license to go wherever, whenever and with whomever you choose."
That's the assurance that Dean (Corey Feldman) gives to his best friend Les (Corey Haim) as he tries to convince him to steal his grandfather's precious Cadillac to go out on a Saturday night. Les knows it very well, since he had already proudly proclaimed to his expecting parents how he was a "freee maaan!" when they asked if he had gotten his license. The thing is that Les didn't really pass his exam, but that's not gonna stop him from having a good time.
License to Drive is mostly divided in two halves: the first one follows Les' attempts to pass his drivers license exam. The second half, however, follows his attempts to charm Mercedes (Heather Graham), the girl of his dreams, after she agrees to go out with him. But, like Murphy says, what has to go wrong, will go wrong, and the night becomes a hell-ish attempt from Les to return home safe and sound.
This is a film loaded with nostalgia for me. It was a frequent watch between me and my friends when we were teens, to the point that the day I passed my drivers license exam, I paged my best friend "I'm a freee maaan!" Still, for some reason I hadn't revisited it in a good while, so I was curious to see how well it would hold up 35 years after its release. So imagine my surprise when I found out it held up pretty well.
For most of its duration, the film moves within the realms of suburban magical realism as we experience Les' "painstaking" school bus trips, shackled to the seats with a cackling evil driver, or when we see him take his knowledge exam with the computer constantly blaring "INCORRECT" at him. There's also the bit with his road exam, where the examiner (James Avery) throws the clipboard out the window choosing to use his cup of coffee as the decider of Les' fate: "You burn me, you fail. You don't, you pass." This is made more funny when it's contrasted with the experience of Les' twin sister (Nina Siemaszko) and her examiner.
That first half is when the film mostly succeeds for me. The second half, which follows Les' date with Mercedes, and his subsequent adventures with Dean and Charles (Michael Manasseri) are still funny, but not as unique or effective as the first half. The treatment of the character of Mercedes might also be seen as a bit problematic, but it's played lightly enough. The last act which features Les driving his pregnant mother to the hospital could've been executed way better than it was and I would even argue was not necessary.
Even with those quibbles, I still think the film mostly succeeds in presenting this mix of absurdist and realist piece of teen fluff. Haim and Feldman are extremely likeable and have great chemistry as the leads. Plus, I think most of us can identify with the way the film transmits the desperation and anxiety of every teenager in earning their drivers license. After all, it's not an ordinary piece of paper; it's a license to live and to be a freeee maaan!
Grade: 4
ELEMENTAL
(2023, Sohn)
https://i.imgur.com/L8YyBJT.jpg
"There’s a word in Fireish. Deshlock. It means embrace the light when it burns because it won’t always last forever."
Set in Element City, Elemental follows volatile Ember (Leah Lewis), a fire element that tends to lose her temper from time to time, as she navigates some tough decisions in her life. First, she is set to take over her family store which somehow seems to spark her fiery outbursts, and second, she's started developing a friendship with Wade (Mamoudou Athie), a more easy-going water element. Unfortunately, "elements cannot mix!", or so they are told.
Directed by Peter Sohn, a filmmaker and animator of Korean descent, Elemental uses its inventive premise to make some statements about discrimination and xenophobia. Sohn has said that a lot of the film's story is inspired in his own life as the son of Korean immigrants who happened to marry a white woman. Some of these parallelisms waver between cleverly integrated and heavy-handed, but they mostly stick to the former.
What the premise does is provide a canvas for some really colorful moments of animation as we see all these element "races": fire, water, air, and earth, interact together. There is also a charm to Ember and Wade's relationship which the animators successfully convey. I wish I could've seen the English version, but I saw the Spanish dubbed one. However, the dubbing actors were also pretty good.
The story does feel muddled from time to time with perhaps a few unnecessary tangents or excessive sequences (the final flood comes to mind) and there are some things that you know are put there to pull our heart strings in some not-so-subtle manipulative ways, but most of them work well enough. Overall, Elemental carries a solid message of acceptance and tolerance told in a creative and charming way, so let's embrace it.
Grade: 3
TIN TOY
(1988, Lasseter)
https://i.imgur.com/vO8YHsV.jpg
"Why didn't we just give them the boxes instead?"
Said every parent after watching their kids play non-stop with the box of the most expensive toy ever. That is actually the twist of this very early Pixar short film, their fourth actually, titled Tin Toy. The short follows the titular toy as it tries to escape from a baby who seems determined to grab him.
Anyone can probably see the direct line between this and Lasseter's upcoming Toy Story. Hey, maybe the baby is a baby Sid! or Andy? Either way, it is a fun and interesting watch, especially when considering the trajectory and evolution of animation and CGI.
The animation of the baby (and its drool!) is particularly crude, which has always been true about human characters. But at the time of its development, it had to be an incredible achievement. The tin toy, however, looks great. So great that you just want to grab it and play with it... unless there's a box nearby.
Grade: 3.5
THE ADVENTURES OF ANDRÉ AND WALLY B.
(1984, Smith)
https://i.imgur.com/O1nw1Ep.jpg
"We wanted a *character*. This was the reason for the android stipulation."
Released in 1984, The Adventures of André and Wally B. is a first short film produced by Lucasfilm Computer Graphics Project, which would later become Pixar. The above was one of the motivations of director Alvy Ray Smith when making this short film; they wanted a character to showcase their abilities to "create" something memorable.
Originally supposed to feature an android waking up to the world, a symbol of the awakening of CGI, the short was changed to feature André, a boy that is suddenly bothered by a bumblebee, which causes him to run from it. This allows the filmmakers to feature not only characters but notable actions like running in a fluid motion; something that was not usual in computer animation.
As is expected, the short is very, well, short and simple but that doesn't take away from its groundbreaking nature back in the 1980s. One has to wonder why Pixar never brought these characters back, but they certainly succeeded in creating something unique that would change the world of animation and filmmaking forever.
Grade: N/A
KNICK KNACK
(1989, Lasseter)
https://i.imgur.com/WNQ97Ao.jpg
knick·knack: a small trivial object, usually a household ornament.
That's how Merriam-Webster defines the term "knick knack". However, this snowman certainly doesn't seem to consider himself trivial. Knick Knack follows his attempts to break out of his snow globe in order to join other ornaments in a summer-themed party.
Yet another one of Pixar's very first shorts, this one doesn't really try to go beyond the comedy of its own premise, but it doesn't need to do. It's just a simple short film full of funny gags and "physical" comedy and it succeeds in that.
The design of the snowman is very good, giving a vibe that moves between charming and mischievous. As the snowman tries to bump, drill, explode his way out of the snow globe, you kinda want him to succeed, but still enjoy watching him try and fail each and every time. Paving the way for future Pixar projects, this certainly isn't trivial at all.
Grade: 3.5
GERI'S GAME
(1997, Pinkava)
https://i.imgur.com/NIYQ93V.jpg
"When does the loneliness of old age begin?" --Janusz Korczak
When we were kids we played with everybody; at school, at the park, everywhere. But as we grew up, we grew more selective and our pool of friends tend to become smaller and smaller, until? When does loneliness begin? At what point we are left with no friends and no one to "play with"?
Geri's Game, one of the first short films from Pixar, seems to play with that notion. The short film follows an elderly man in a park engaged in an aggresive game of chess against... himself? When did this begin?
The short is notable for being the first film from Pixar to feature a "human being" as its main character. Geri (Bob Peterson) is a wonderfully designed character that, unlike the baby in Knick Knack, feels real and loaded with emotions of happiness, anxiety, cockiness, and yes, loneliness.
I remember seeing this along with A Bug's Life and always sticking with me for feeling different. Yes, it is funny to see the old man playing against himself, but there's a tragic undertone to it, which is the loneliness of old age. As someone who was extremely close with his grandparents and that has always been moved by any media related to the elderly, this has always hit close to home. Let's hope that we can always find someone to play with and that this loneliness never begins for any of us.
Grade: 4.5
PARTLY CLOUDY
(2009, Sohn)
https://i.imgur.com/EjA8SXr.jpg
"Here is a baby with eyes of blue, straight from heaven, right to you. Or - straight from heaven up above, here is a baby for you to love."
The above is a quote from the opening of Dumbo, where we see storks delivering babies all over the world. Being a kid, writer and director Peter Sohn wondered where the storks got the babies from and he deduced it was from the clouds. That is what inspired him to do this short film 20+ years later.
Partly Cloudy shows us groups of clouds creating babies of all sorts for every creature; kittens, puppies, human babies, everything. Our lead cloud, Gus, seems to have the task of creating babies for creatures like alligators, sharks, and porcupines, which ends up being the crux for his assigned stork, Peck.
It is a very simple short, but it's cute and fun, but I still think it says something about how we can always adjust for whatever we need to do. It applies to the storks, but also the expectant parents that the storks will visit. Those that will receive that baby, straight from heaven, for them to love.
Grade: 3
PIPER
(2016, Barillaro)
https://i.imgur.com/aSv5IQj.jpg
"I’ve noticed when I fear something, if I just end up doing it, I’m grateful in the end." --Colleen Hoover
Fear tends to paralyze us. We refuse to move on, and more often than not, we later regret not doing the things we wanted to do because of fear. Still, there is something refreshing and liberating in having fear and still daring to do something, and then doing it! It makes us confident, lead us to discovery of new things, and it sometimes allows us to see things in a perspective that's totally different of how we were seeing things in the first place; which is kinda the basis of this short.
Piper follows a baby sandpiper as she's learning to find her own food in a seashore. but when a huge rising tide ends up soaking her, the fear to go through it again paralyzes her. It isn't until she dares to go at it again that she ends up not only discovering that she can, but also discovering new friends, and also discovering new ways to see things.
It's amazing how a short film can do so much in less than 6 minutes. First, the animation is amazing and the character design is charming and cute as hell. But most importantly, in a short time, you learn about growing up, overcoming fears, seeing things through a different lens, and also about making new unlikely friends. All things that the little piper found out, just by doing what she feared; things that I'm sure she's grateful in the end.
Grade: 4
UNCLE JOSH IN A SPOOKY HOTEL
(1900, Porter)
https://i.imgur.com/3wJTcFX.jpg
"You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave"
The above is one of the climatic lines from "Hotel California", the popular song from The Eagles. The thing is that haunted hotels have been a staple of horror and mystery films since forever. There's something about staying in a foreign place where you're not necessarily in control of your surroundings that lends itself so well to this kinds of stories, which is probably why pioneering filmmaker Edwin Porter set this "sequel" in a "spooky hotel".
This is the second short film featuring the character of Uncle Josh (Charles Manley); the first one had him having spooky nightmares, so why not put him in a spooky hotel now? Uncle Josh gets to his room and starts having a conversation with the landlord, when a "spooky" presence starts to play some "spooky" pranks on both.
The film is basically a sketch of slapstick and physical comedy in a "spooky" setting, but it's fun to watch. Plus, as is usual with these shorts, at less than 2 minutes it's not much of a hassle to get through them. I did find the design of the ghost, the sheet and the eyes, to be effective and the physical comedy was well executed by Manley and his co-star.
Grade: N/A
NINE QUEENS
(2000, Bielinsky)
A film from Argentina
https://i.imgur.com/4X04C1g.png
"They are there, but you can't see them. That's what it's all about. They're there, but they aren't. So mind your briefcase, your case, your door... your window, your car, your savings. Mind your ass, because they're there and they'll always be."
That's one of the many lessons that veteran con-man Marcos (Ricardo Darín) tries to instill in the young Juan (Gastón Pauls) in this Argentinean film. Even if you can't see them, con artists are everywhere; so you better watch out cause when you least expect it, you might be the one being had.
Nine Queens follows the unlikely partnership between Marcos and Juan, as they set out to sell a set of counterfeit stamps. But as usual, things not always work the way you expect, as they constantly stumble upon "spitters, breakers, skin workers, blind fronts, hoisters, hooks, stalls, petermans, night raiders, mustard chuckers, fences, operators, swindlers", all of which are trying to get the best of them as well.
Even though it is not an American film, Nine Queens feels a lot like what you would expect from a 2000 American film would feel. The film has a clever, witty script, full of twists and turns, with a bit of a rushed up pace, which serves the film well. Darín and Pauls are both great in their roles to the point that you don't know whether to root for them or dislike them. Leticia Brédice also has a nice turn as Marcos' sister, who ends up reluctantly involved in his brother's "business".
This film was very well received, so I had been hearing about it since its release. However, for some reason I had never taken the chance, but I'm very pleased I finally did. The film is well structured, well paced, and well acted. As for the twists, even if you can't see them, they're there, and they're bound to get you one way or the other.
Grade: 4
HOLOCAUST 2000
a.k.a. THE CHOSEN
(1977, De Martino)
https://i.imgur.com/w0jeZes.jpg
"Look at the world around you ... The cup of catastrophe is filled to the brim. Above it, held by tension -- don't you be the one man to add the drop that will spill it."
Holocaust 2000 follows Robert Caine (Kirk Douglas), an industrialist that's in the middle of designing a revolutionary thermonuclear plant in the Middle East. However, this decision seems to unleash a series of mysterious and deadly occurrences that might end up paving the way for the arrival of the Antichrist himself.
Pollution, lack of resources, hunger, nuclear warfare... those are some of the ominous portents that Caine is warned about; that he might be directly responsible of. If all of this sounds suspiciously similar to The Omen, well, it's because it is. This film was released a year after, probably to cash in on its success. Still, for some reason, I had never heard of it until last week.
The film does have some pieces in the right place. The film walks a fine line between thriller and horror, and there are some neat deaths. There is an effective eerie ambience that probably peaks halfway through the film with a haunting dream that Caine has. Douglas is a competent lead; although being in his 60s, his romance with 20-something Agostina Belli (which includes quite a bit of nudity) feels a bit cringey.
The story does feel a bit muddled, and the logistics of how the Antichrist will take control feel more like just a bunch of things thrown randomly together, even if it doesn't make much sense. Finally, even though I understand them holding onto the antagonist for the sake of the twist, they could've done a lot more with him as far as how threatening he is, and how high the stakes should feel.
Despite my reservations with the film, I still think it is an interesting watch. Even though it could've used a better script and a stronger use of its apocalyptic stakes, there is a weird and eerie charm to it that I just felt drawn to. Plus, I've been a fan of Kirk Douglas' early stuff, so even if he's not in top form here, it was nice to see him hamming it up.
Grade: 2.5
Here's my summary for JULY 2023:
A film based on a video game (Nat'l Video Game Day, July 8): Mortal Kombat (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2399036-mortal_kombat.html)
A film with a title that starts with the letters M or N: Mission: Impossible - Fallout (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2399062-mission_impossible_-_fallout.html)
A film about aliens or alien abductions (World UFO Day, July 2): Nope (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2400544-nope.html)
A film from Ken Burns (born July 29): Brooklyn Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2400879-brooklyn_bridge.html)
A film from Argentina (Independence Day, July 9): Nine Queens (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2403313-nine_queens.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ybrX94xQm8lXYpZAPRmwD9iIbWP.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/AkJQpZp9WoNdj7pLYSj1L0RcMMN.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/AcKVlWaNVVVFQwro3nLXqPljcYA.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/tYx9GYyA34giTiJQL95TSxpLZ6q.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/tabMRXUTTBmprGax6ON2r9yBN0D.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
Silent short films: Uncle Josh at the Moving Picture Show (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2399150-uncle_josh_at_the_moving_picture_show.html), Uncle Josh's Nightmare (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2400887-uncle_joshs_nightmare.html), Uncle Josh in a Spooky Hotel (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2403160-uncle_josh_in_a_spooky_hotel.html)
The Hire short films: Powder Keg (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401396-powder_keg.html), Ticker (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401412-ticker.html), The Escape (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2401442-the_escape.html)
Pixar short films: Tin Toy (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402537-tin_toy.html), The Adventures of André and Wally B. (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402545-the_adventures_of_andr_and_wally_b..html), Knick Knack (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402691-knick_knack.html), Geri's Game (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402935-geris_game.html), Partly Cloudy (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2403089-partly_cloudy.html), Piper (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2403107-piper.html)
Rewatches: Vertigo (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2398930-vertigo.html), Saludos Amigos (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2400883-saludos_amigos.html), License to Drive (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402308-license_to_drive.html)
Theater outings: Elemental (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2402516-elemental.html)
Others: Holocaust 2000 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2403546-holocaust_2000.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/5RS5Zu9rP7DOgBKrkLrclWFEIlZ.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/peN3L30TRi5MKlNrS369A7om6KB.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/msRs9vkPB0jrKxblwxVGsYX5a34.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/2VM8NZcMm78zCoQJi59ei6SWmwx.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/iHhGquZLHdm8cFKzJpgXq8HdQk0.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/lMj5Gt0mRDEWnvJnNvFa7if77P9.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/yRjtvmRXgZoY8P9Ug28G9OITD9E.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/vynPRSjD78EWQpWbvEimlU55Ke.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ouk2QFv4NySNfitAgXqnTtO5vA1.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/8PdCk3T9EkcKniUviDogWFCXx28.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/oqYX2AJV53ibLVPrUZ1Z5XlGv5U.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/rfEkkVzmrMYqGezNLl02mVyJCP2.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/15uOEfqBNTVtDUT7hGBVCka0rZz.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/kdZyHjsSHYBO53o59ZMz4fOXcmk.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/dDVgFqDA8l0ZWV4ZYVpfNp6ztby.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/8riWcADI1ekEiBguVB9vkilhiQm.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/leolSyDotDFWoaZ5xmmVrz0VUyD.jpg
Not counting rewatches, my favorite first-time watch was probably Nine Queens. Pretty cool, slick, and twisty thriller.
My least favorite was probably Mortal Kombat.
I forgot to post this, but I was a contestant in the Middle Class Film Class Trivia Tournament of Champions. If anyone's interested in checking out my appearances, here they are...
MCFC Movie Trivia Tournament - Round 1 Ep 1 (https://www.mcfcpodcast.com/episodes/episode/7c823189/mcfc-movie-trivia-tournament-round-1-ep-1)
MCFC Movie Trivia Tournament - Round 2 Ep 2 (https://www.mcfcpodcast.com/episodes/episode/78fe0db1/mcfc-movie-trivia-tournament-round-2-ep-2)
MCFC Movie Trivia Tournament - FINALE (https://www.mcfcpodcast.com/episodes/episode/7bfeb7ae/mcfc-movie-trivia-tournament-finale)
Obviously, knowing that I made it into the second round and then the finale, is a bit spoilerific, but hopefully you can still enjoy the episodes. As for how I did in the Finale? That one I'll keep to myself, so it's up to you to find out.
I also recommend you checking out the other episodes of the trivia. Pete is a great host and all the contestants are a lot of fun to listen to.
For those that listen to The Movie Loot, we just put out a new episode: The Disappointing Loot. In this episode, me and my friend Sean (from the Review It Yourself Podcast) talk about disappointing films and share our most disappointing film experiences. Check it out!
The Movie Loot 86: The Disappointing Loot (with Sean from Review It Yourself) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13198697-the-movie-loot-86-the-disappointing-loot-with-sean-from-review-it-yourself.mp3?download=true)
Look for it also on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/0psInfZbmksglX2589bXTf?si=8ffa4aef9c4445c9), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-86-the-disappointing-loot-with-sean/id1578191119?i=1000624109060), Google Podcasts, etc.
My latest "assignment" episode is out and this is a special one!
The Movie Loot: The Birthday Assignment (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13395405-the-movie-loot-the-birthday-assignment.mp3?download=true)
In this one, I choose the usual set of 5 categories to guide me on what to watch during the month, but I also open it up for people to recommend films as some sort of "gift" to me :D I've been doing this for 3+ years now and it has always resulted in some fun recs.
You can also see the live broadcast I did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXB_mTM8A3M)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-birthday-assignment/id1578191119?i=1000624275766), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/4Mk8qEgMf0FLkAQounWFvS?si=8f50f7f70f8a4725), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzM5NTQwNQ?sa=X&ved=0CAQQ8qgGahcKEwi4vpym69mAAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), or any other.
Here are the criteria we chose for AUGUST 2023:
A film from the 1980s:
A film from the Sight & Sound Greatest Films list whose ranking includes the #8:
A film mostly set on a plane (Nat'l Aviation Day, August 19):
A film from William Friedkin (born August 29):
A film from Cote d'Ivoire (Independence Day, August 7):
SpelingError
08-13-23, 12:59 PM
Happy early/late birthday!
SpelingError
08-13-23, 01:04 PM
Also, I hope you enjoy Sorcerer. It's great.
For those interested, I was a guest once again at Silver Screeners, with my friend Frank Mandosa. In honor of Alfred Hitchcock's birthday, we talked about two of his best films: his personal favorite, Shadow of a Doubt and my personal favorite, Vertigo. Check it out here or on any podcasting platform.
Silver Screeners, Episode 104: 1943's Shadow of a Doubt and 1958's Vertigo with special guest Carlo of The Movie Loot podcast (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3Bc669z70qiUzdHTnHzLXh?si=a1585280993a4783)
THE OLD DARK HOUSE
(1932, Whale)
https://i.imgur.com/1JgQfhF.jpg
"They were all godless here. They used to bring their women here - brazen, lolling creatures in silks and satins. They filled the house with laughter and sin, laughter and sin. And if I ever went down among them, my own father and brothers - they would tell me to go away and pray, and I prayed - and left them with their lustful red and white women."
The Old Dark House follows a group of people who seek shelter from a storm in the titular house, inhabited by the mysterious Femm family. As they prepare to spend the night, a series of strange incidents are bound to keep them awake and alert all night. Will they go away and pray, or will they try to find answers?
The group of travelers include young couple Philip and Margaret Waverton (Raymond Massey and Gloria Stuart) and their friend Roger Penderel (Melvyn Douglas). They are later joined by Sir William Porterhouse (Charles Laughton) and his partner Gladys (Lilian Bond), a chorus girl that ends up falling in love with Roger.
Directed by James Whale, The Old Dark House features an ensemble cast that's mostly solid, even if their actions don't always make sense. Ernest Thesiger and Eva Moore are pretty good as the main Femm couple. The relationship between Gladys and Roger is one of those eye-rolling, instant love encounters; but Douglas and Bond had solid chemistry, and since that's a typical sign of the times, I can let it slide.
Aside from the above, the most notable cast member is obviously Boris Karloff who plays Morgan, the volatile mute butler of the Femm's. Although he seems to be the most tangible source of scares, Whale also uses light and sounds to successfully build an atmosphere of dread around the house and its main inhabitants.
The story does seem a bit scattered at times, as Whale seems to throw multiple things at us to see what scares us the most, but for the most part, it all works. So if you're looking for a classic haunted house film, that's short and to the point, and full of laughter and sin? Don't go away and pray; it's here.
Grade: 3.5
THE FOG
(1980, Carpenter)
https://i.imgur.com/vNAKu5R.jpg
"Get inside and lock your doors. Close your windows. There's something in the fog."
That's the warning given by local radio DJ Stevie Wayne (Adrienne Barbeau) towards the end of the film as the titular fog engulfs the town of Antonio Bay endangering its residents. But what is in the fog? Only the angry ghosts of sailors that were killed a century before by the eventual town founders, thus cursing the town.
The Fog follows a group of people that find out about what's happening while trying to alert the townspeople and survive. They include Stevie and her young son, town resident Nick Castle (Tom Atkins) and a young hitchiker he picks up (Jamie Lee Curtis). There is also Father Malone (Hal Holbrook) who finds out about the curse and is determined to make it public, and Kathy Williams (Janet Leigh), the organizer of the town centennial who is determined to cover it all up.
This is a film that I remember having seen back when I was a kid, but for some reason had not revisited it. However, I still had some memories burned in my mind, like the shadowy silhouettes of the ghosts against the eerie fog, or a woman climbing outside of a lighthouse to escape them. So even if I didn't remember the logistics of the plot, something was done right as far as ambience and mood.
Going back to it now, after 40+ years, I was glad to see how well it holds up. The best part is indeed the eerie and dread-filled atmosphere that the film patiently builds around the curse and the potential arrival of these ghosts. Carpenter takes his time allowing us to warm up to the characters, while giving us some doses of good scares in the process. There's some real talent in the way he builds his jumpscares that works so well, without feeling gimmicky.
As for the characters, they're all solid and strong characters, even if they're not fully dimensional. I don't think the relationship between Atkins and Curtis was entirely necessary, but they do have good chemistry. But as the title says, the real star is this fog that Carpenter uses to frame this threat, while making the most of the minimalist special effects and makeup as the ghosts are mostly hidden. After all, there is something in the fog, but you just need to see the fog to be afraid.
Grade: 4
THE DYATLOV PASS CASE
(2016, Lemmino)
https://i.imgur.com/fqVqtoO.jpg
"The cause of death was an unknown compelling force which the hikers where unable to overcome."
In late January 1959, nine Soviet hikers ventured into the Siberian mountains. A couple of weeks later they were all found dead near the titular pass under mysterious circumstances. The above quote is the enigmatic yet ominous conclusion of the lead investigator of the case, Lev Ivanov.
The Dyatlov Pass Case is a short documentary by YouTube creator LEMMiNO that chronicles most of the facts about the case, presenting possible explanations, while trying to offer a potential conclusion to what could've been this "unknown compelling force". It is a fairly simple documentary but it is well structured and engaging.
I love how LEMMiNO goes as far as presenting all of the possible explanations, which go from something as "simple" as an avalanche to something as "far out" as UFO attacks, only to then present what seems like one of the most grounded conclusions. Still, it's interesting to see him raise questions and leave them out there.
The case still manages to generate interest and curiosity because of the nature of the deaths and how long it was until satisfactory conclusions were offered. There have been numerous sensible explanations offered before and after this documentary came out, and still, the mystery seems to have life of its own; like an unknown compelling force itself that people are unable to overcome.
Grade: 3.5
SORCERER
(1977, Friedkin)
A film from William Friedkin
https://i.imgur.com/dPNLo9R.jpg
"No one is just anything"
That is the statement given by the wife of wealthy French banker Victor Manzon (Bruno Cremer) as they discuss a story about soldiers and how they follow orders, how their actions affect others, and how more often than not fate plays a hand in how our lives and the lives of others end up. Something that Victor will experience hours after this discussion in this sorta "remake" of 1953's The Wages of Fear.
Sorcerer follows Victor, along with three other characters: Jackie (Roy Scheider), Nilo (Francisco Rabal), and Kassem (Amidou), all of which are wanted and on the run for different reasons leading them to the remote South American village of Porvenir. But as the above quote says, no one is just anything. The four of them are more than just wanted men, but what will fate have in store for them here? Turns out it is two trucks loaded with unstable dynamite.
This is a film that has been recommended to me for years, but being the completist that I am, I wanted to see Wages first (which I did last year). So when William Friedkin passed away a couple of weeks ago, I thought it was way overdue for me to check this out and I'm so glad I did. Much like Wages, this film is the perfect representation of "constant tension", which haunts these three characters from wherever they come from to every bar and every jungle road where they end up.
What Friedkin does different than director Henri-Georges Clouzot is to give a bit more depth and background to these characters. Now, granted, I don't think background and explanations are always necessary, but those first 30 minutes where you see how these four characters end up where they're at are really effective and give a lot of weight to what will happen in the rest of the film.
Also, the way that Friedkin puts us in those trucks, and how seamlessly he lets us see where they're driving and how they're driving it's extremely well done. Certainly, there is a bit of a stretch in believing that anyone would look at this rickety old-ass bridge and still think they can drive two big trucks through, but that still gives us one of the most breathtakingly tense moments of the film.
I also massively appreciated the many ways in which Friedkin managed to differentiate this film from The Wages of Fear, because as similar as they are, he still follows different beats and different paths in that last half that still kept me on my toes. So, even though some people would call this a remake, no film is just anything. And as good as The Wages of Fear is, this film is just a bit more.
Grade: 4.5
StuSmallz
08-26-23, 04:30 AM
Yeah, I watched about the first half of that a while ago, due to that being all that was I able to find of it uploaded online, and lacking a "more legal" way to check it out, so I should definitely go back and finish it soon if I can.
Busy days, so here's a couple of things to catch up...
First, I was a guest for a third time on Brian Skutle's Sonic Cinema, this time to talk about David Fincher's The Game. You can check it out here:
Sonic Cinema Episode 141 – Discussing “The Game” (https://sonic-cinema.com/wordpress/2023/08/episode-141-discussing-the-game/)
Also available on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, etc.
Second, I was also a guest on Forgotten Filmcast, to discuss a "forgotten" but still a bit interesting film called Holocaust 2000 (which I reviewed here a while ago). You can check it out here:
Forgotten Filmcast Episode 195: Holocaust 2000 (https://forgottenfilmcast.wordpress.com/2023/08/28/forgotten-filmcast-episode-195-holocaust-2000/)
Again, also available on most podcasting and streaming platforms.
And finally, if you can tolerate more than two spoonfuls of me, then check out my own episode on David Fincher on The Movie Loot. I met with academic and writer Richard Dyer, and we talked about his work and career, and shared our Top 5 Fincher films. Check it out here:
The Movie Loot 90: The Fincher Loot (with Richard Dyer) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13488178-the-movie-loot-90-the-fincher-loot-with-richard-dyer.mp3?download=true)
Also available on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3j40Pu1FgtxwYGXf0IkACV?si=62f01f9c7a8e4144), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-90-the-fincher-loot-with-richard-dyer/id1578191119?i=1000626033516), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzQ4ODE3OA?sa=X&ved=0CAQQ8qgGahcKEwiIqIuApYKBAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), and other streaming platforms.
Enjoy!
SpelingError
08-29-23, 11:50 PM
Certainly, there is a bit of a stretch in believing that anyone would look at this rickety old-ass bridge and still think they can drive two big trucks through, but that still gives us one of the most breathtakingly tense moments of the film.
They actually did that in real life for the film. Friedkin was a bit of a madman.
StuSmallz
08-30-23, 04:43 AM
I heard it was a specially constructed hydraulic bridge made just for the production, that they could mechanically sway at will, though.
SpelingError
08-30-23, 09:11 AM
Probably so. Either way, it's a great sequence, so I'm fine with showing a bit of suspension of disbelief.
Probably so. Either way, it's a great sequence, so I'm fine with showing a bit of suspension of disbelief.
I agree. At the end of the day, it's not about the bridge itself, but about the lengths these men would go for this "wage".
NIGHT OF THE KINGS
(2020, Lacôte)
A film from Cote d'Ivoire
-- recommended by Sylvie (https://slywit.wordpress.com/) --
https://i.imgur.com/rY0PXyH.jpg
"From now on, you're Roman, the prince without a kingdom. When the red moon comes out tonight or tomorrow, you'll tell us stories."
Set in MACA, a remote prison in Cote d'Ivoire, Night of the Kings follows a young thief and gang member (Bakary Koné) who finds himself reluctantly appointed as "Roman", or storyteller, by Blackbeard (Steve Tientcheu), a fellow prisoner who serves as "king" from within. Since his health is failing, Blackbeard is pressured to surrender his position and commit suicide, according to their beliefs. But in an effort to delay the inevitable, he tasks Roman to tell stories to the inmate population.
This is a film I hadn't heard of until a couple of months ago, but I've always said it's really interesting to experience films from other countries and cultures. Night of the Kings goes a bit further, not only in how it highlights some specific cultural aspects of Cote d'Ivoire, but also a specific belief system from within this prison. I'm not sure how much of this system is based in real life, but I still find it mesmerizing.
However, the film doesn't dwell as much in the power struggle between Blackbeard and his ambitious subordinate/successor Lass (Abdoul-Karim Konate), or in the logistics of how/why Roman has to tell stories until the "red moon" sets. Instead, the film puts you in the middle of this hypnotizing ceremony to perhaps let you experience it in the same trance-like state as some of the prisoners.
The thing about the film is that, much like Roman's stories seem to weave in and out, leaving his listeners asking for more, the film weaves in and out of certain characters and subplots leaving us asking for more. Tientcheu might be the one I wanted to see more from, and the film certainly loses a bit of oomphh when he's not in. But then there's also Lass, or the guards that stay at the sidelines watching all of this unfold; all stories that seemed worthy of a bit more.
French actor Denis Lavant (Holy Motors, Les amants pont du neuf) also has a supporting performance as the only white prisoner in MACA. It's not a big role, but Lavant does his usual eccentric bit as he warns Roman about what could be his fate. But for now, he just has to tell stories, while we sit there mesmerized in the haze of the film.
Grade: 3.5
THREE O'CLOCK HIGH
(1987, Joanou)
A film from the 1980s
-- recommended by Josh (from Your Next Favorite Movie Podcast (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/your-next-favorite-movie/id1549302963)) --
https://i.imgur.com/v7GsFAs.jpg
"You and me, we're gonna have a fight today, after school. 3:00 in the parking lot. You try and run, I'm gonna track you down; you go to a teacher, it's only gonna get worse; you sneak home, I'm gonna be under your bed. You and me. 3:00"
That's a sentence that every student in Weaver High School dreads, but as fate had it, it would fall on meek student and school journalist Jerry Mitchell (Casey Siemazko). Three O'Clock High follows Jerry's day after he receives this threat from new student/juvenile delinquent Buddy Revell (Richard Tyson) when he awkwardly approached him in the school restroom for a school newspaper interview; something that Buddy's not happy about.
This is a film I knew about, but for some weird reason, I hadn't seen. Weird, because growing up in the 1980s, this seems pretty much like my kind of film at the moment. So I was happy when my friend Josh recommended it to me as a "birthday gift", and I was happier when it turned out to be a pleasant and enjoyable surprise.
Three O'Clock High inhabits that same space as other teen films of the era that walk within that "suburban magical realism" realm; kinda like Better Off Dead or License to Drive. The events are grounded in reality, but are presented in ways that make them feel they're not. This is done to help heighten the dread, the tension, and the feeling of being trapped by the main character, usually in hilarious ways.
In this regard, the direction of Phil Joanou, helped by the cinematography of Barry Sonnenfeld, was really fantastic. The way they move the camera, the angles they choose, how they block certain scenes, it was definitely above the average teen movie standards. In addition, the two leads are pretty solid, which makes you wonder why both of them didn't have better careers. I do think the character of Buddy could've been more developed, but it was still a pretty good performance from Tyson.
Three O'Clock High is also interesting in how it subverts some of the typical tropes of the genre. There are a couple of times where you think it's going to zig, but then it zags, which felt refreshing. However, what happens in the last act, although surprising, felt less interesting than what could've been. Also, the way they handle the main two female characters, both Jerry's romantic interests, felt as if the script didn't necessarily knew what to do or where to go.
Despite those flaws, Three O'Clock High was overall a refreshing take on the teen school sub-genre. Well acted, neatly directed and shot, and maybe giving more credit to its audience than most films of the genre do. Certainly a must-watch for 1980s kids, and maybe to anybody that enjoys a good teen comedy.
Grade: 3.5
THE GAME
(1997, Fincher)
https://i.imgur.com/Xkam1se.png
"I'm being toyed with by a bunch of depraved children."
If you're looking for a review, then check out what I wrote back in 2021 (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2218626-the_game.html). There really isn't much I would add. If you're looking for what makes a film "Fincheresque", then look no further than this: an isolated man, obsessed with some "quest" that leads him into dark and morally ambiguous places. The Game is an exemplification of Fincher's style – people playing "adult" games – but it is also an undervalued, neat little thriller.
Grade: 4
ZODIAC
(2007, Fincher)
https://i.imgur.com/0LWIOcl.jpg
"I... I need to know who he is. I... I need to stand there, I need to look him in the eye, and I need to know that it's him."
That's what cartoonist-turned-investigator Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal) confesses to his wife. But the statement serves as much to put forward this film's thesis than to highlight Graysmith's obsession. You see this film is not necessarily about the Zodiac Killer, but rather about how three different people become obsessed and ultimately consumed by the "need to know".
Starting in 1969, Zodiac mostly focuses on Graysmith, but it also follows police detective Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) and journalist Paul Avery (Robert Downey, Jr.), all of which "need to know" who this killer is for different reasons; even if it is at the expense of their careers, their families, or even their lives.
David Fincher uses a clever story structure to reel us in with a bunch of incredibly intense, and sometimes gruesome murder sequences during the first act. Much like the Zodiac Killer himself used different modus operandi for each murder, the way Fincher handles these sequences is different, but they're all incredibly effective. I can say that the Lake Berryessa scene is one that sticks with you.
However, as the film progresses, Fincher turns the tables on us to focus more on these three characters, becoming more of a character study than a plot-driven film. Thankfully, all three actors are up to the task delivering excellent performances all around. Downey, Jr. is particularly impressive in one of his best performances before he became absorbed by the MCU machinery.
However, it is Gyllenhaal the one that delivers the most interesting and probably complex performance. By focusing on his obsession, Fincher is putting us in his shoes, entangling us in the same quest to find out who is this killer, even though we all know the quest will ultimately be "pointless" and the end will not be "satisfactory".
But much like The Game, this fits perfectly into Fincher's usual themes and tropes, making us follow isolated characters obsessed with "games" that lead them into dark, dangerous, and morally ambiguous places. Graysmith needs to know, and yes, we need to know as well, but Fincher doesn't know and maybe doesn't even care. It's up to us to live with that answer.
Grade: 5
THE CONFORMIST
(1970, Bertolucci)
A film from the Sight & Sound Greatest Films list whose ranking includes the #8 (#118)
-- recommended by Best Film Ever (https://bestfilmever.podbean.com/) --
https://i.imgur.com/SYTMEQs.jpg
"I've already repented. I want to be excused by society. Yes. I want to confess today the sin I'll commit tomorrow. One sin atones for another. It is the price I must pay society. And I shall pay it."
Set near the beginning of World War II, The Conformist follows Marcello Clerici (Jean-Louis Trintignant), a Fascist that is instructed to assassinate his former mentor and professor. But things get complicated when he starts a relationship with the professor's wife. Will he pay the price?
This is a film I had barely heard of, but when my friend Ian recommended it and I read the plot, I was immediately intrigued. Bertolucci's direction uses a non-linear narrative as the film starts with Marcello preparing for his mission, but then starts going back and forth to different moments in his past that led him to where he is now.
This approach felt a bit scattered to me and it took me a while to get into the film's wavelength. I also felt that, despite all the flashbacks, I found it a bit hard to connect with the characters and their motivations. However, I appreciated the tonal shift in the last act to a more dark and bleak one, leading to its uncompromising conclusion. Aside from that, the direction and cinematography are great.
Regardless of how much I appreciated its strengths, I still feel like I missed something. Overall, I enjoyed it, but I think that my inability to get into the film's vibe early on hindered its overall effect. Bottom line, this is a film I feel I might or should revisit again at some point to maybe appreciate it more. It is the price I must pay, and I shall pay it.
Grade: 3
FLIGHTPLAN
(2005, Schwentke)
A film mostly set on a plane
-- recommended by Andrew, a.k.a. desertgranite (https://twitter.com/desertgranite) --
https://i.imgur.com/uob4YT6.jpg
"Think about what you're suggesting, captain. That I imagined bringing her on board... and that I'm now pretending to look for her. Does that make any sense? Can you think of a reason why I would do that?"
Occam's razor is a principle that basically states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. That principle is somewhat in the background when airplane engineer Kyle Pratt (Jodie Foster) says the above to the captain of the plane she's in. You see, she has just boarded the plane that is transporting the body of her recently deceased husband from Germany to the US. She is accompanied in the flight by her young daughter Julia (Marlene Lawston), or is she? The thing is that shortly after take-off, Julia disappears but nobody seems to have any recollection or evidence of the girl boarding the plane.
Flightplan follows Kyle's efforts to find her daughter while also trying to keep her sanity and convince the captain and those around her that the simplest explanation is the right one... or is it the simplest? Because, either there's a conspiracy of some sort involving several people including crew members to kidnap Julia to get something out of Kyle... or she's actually struggling with her sanity and has imagined her daughter getting on the plane and is just now realizing she's actually not there as she pretends to look for her. Does either of these possibilities make any sense?
This is a film that I remember got not so good reviews back in the day, which is probably why I avoided it. With time, it has more or less vanished from the public consciousness, so when Andrew recommended it I thought, did I imagine those bad reviews? I did approach it with little to no expectation which maybe hampered the overall effect a bit. The film feels like a bit of a play on Hitchcock's The Lady Vanishes, a film that starts with a similar premise that gets a bit more complex and darker as it goes on. Unfortunately, that's not the case here. Flightplan starts with a mildly intriguing premise that becomes less and less interesting, and more and more generic as it goes on.
And that is the film's biggest weakness. Despite that interesting premise, what ends up happening doesn't really quite compute neither logically nor story-wise. Sure, the amount of things that had to happen for what actually happened to *happen* is laughable and ludicrous, but it is also such a formulaic twist that the film pretty much deflates afterwards. And despite that, the writers still decide to extend things unnecessarily for about 20-25 minutes more, even though it's clear they didn't really know what to do.
Major props to a relatively strong cast that elevates the weak script. Jodie Foster certainly gives it her all, especially in the first two acts. She really conveys the desperation and mental anguish of her character as she tries to internalize what is happening. Peter Sarsgaard is also pretty good as an air mashal that tries to handle the different situations in the plane. Sean Bean plays the captain, but although he does his best, his role is not as relevant as one would think.
According to Occam's razor, it should be pretty simple to get a quality film out of a talented cast. It's the simplest explanation. But this is one of those cases where you just don't understand why would they take a high-caliber actress like Jodie Foster, start her up with such an interesting premise, only to drag it all down halfway through with tired clichés and dumb plot developments. Does that make any sense? Can you think of a reason why they would do that?
Grade: 1.5
THE GUARDIAN
(1990, Friedkin)
A film from William Friedkin
-- recommended by Russell Osborne (https://twitter.com/nonotrelated) --
https://i.imgur.com/GvWVCq8.jpg
"I hope you never have to wake up and find out your worst nightmare is real."
The Guardian follows Phil and Kate (Dwier Brown and Carey Lowell), a young married couple that is going through some changes: Phil was just hired for a new job, they just moved to Los Angeles, and they're about to have a baby. Their worst nightmare, though, is that Camilla (Jenny Seagrove), their lovely new nanny, is actually a supernatural being that sacrifices babies to a tree entity.
Director William Friedkin certainly has a talent for building atmosphere and dread; whether it is in The Exorcist or Killer Joe, or Sorcerer which I just saw earlier this month. His films always give you that sense of uneasiness and danger to its characters, whether that danger is spiritual, human, or in this case, supernatural.
Unfortunately, that effective sense of dread is paired with some weak performances and a script that feels a bit unsure of what to be. Sure, there are elements of fantasy and the supernatural, with bits of gore and horror, but there are times where it borrows from genre thrillers of the 90s like Fatal Attraction, even though some of those borrowings don't necessarily lead anywhere.
The film also doesn't really dive much into the background of what Camilla's doing. Not that there needs to be a whole lot of explanation, but there feels something missing. Coming from Friedkin, this feels a bit "cheap" and mediocre in some aspects, but it still carries that undeniable flavor of dread I mentioned, and I feel that might warrant a watch for some.
Grade: 2
Here's my summary for AUGUST 2023:
A film from the 1980s: Three O'Clock High (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2409387-three_oclock_high.html)
A film from the Sight & Sound Greatest Films list whose ranking includes the #8: The Conformist (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2409673-the_conformist.html) (#118)
A film mostly set on a plane (Nat'l Aviation Day, August 19): Flightplan (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2409759-flightplan.html)
A film from William Friedkin (born August 29): Sorcerer (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2407897-sorcerer.html), The Guardian (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2409849-the_guardian.html)
A film from Cote d'Ivoire (Independence Day, August 7): Night of the Kings (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2408949-night_of_the_kings.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/i6bUiRqrSZo8wcDwPtp43pVF2MC.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/6bzQJ1LeS8BfPPvYrcnhm38zXjU.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/oNjZFzbe7PfF3TxztNHDkinOPyB.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/2b7oexm173SF1FSEq0DdgxZZNRH.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/xSlWCbowlxjBLSCOzFgn6asW0FP.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/lkY6Agn4sucxm2VHrPBk7pQah7m.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
Mystery and horror: The Old Dark House (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2406268-the_old_dark_house.html), The Fog (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2406849-the_fog.html), The Dyatlov Pass Case (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2406854-the_dyatlov_pass_case.html)
Fincher films: The Game (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2218626-the_game.html), Zodiac (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2409476-zodiac.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gnpXV5KChckAdK7EocNoPuXcLD8.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/gZmdq8HB8SBdOHk5XarjCZIiGGk.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/u3IbXzCzPwuJaECcIvKSkyUmf6L.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/4UOa079915QjiTA2u5hT2yKVgUu.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/6YmeO4pB7XTh8P8F960O1uA14JO.jpg
Not a lot of quantity, but some quality. Not counting rewatches, my favorite first-time watch was easily Sorcerer. Even with The Wages of Fear being pretty darn good, Friedkin still managed to make quite something with this remake.
My least favorite was easily Flightplan, but The Guardian was close.
Here is my latest "assignment" episode!
The Movie Loot: The September Assignment (with David Rosen) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13552639-the-movie-loot-the-september-assignment-with-david-rosen.mp3?download=true)
In this one, me and David Rosen, composer and host of Piecing It Together podcast, joined the loot as we chose a set of 5 categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t10a1qYD3jw)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-september-assignment-with-david-rosen/id1578191119?i=1000627033927), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/3PeVwERIt8H4hn8Gs9mHMp?si=98c4b094a6f74f62), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz?sa=X&ved=0CAcQrrcFahcKEwio48jk0ZeBAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), or any other.
Here are the criteria we chose for SEPTEMBER 2023:
A film from Oliver Stone (born September 15):
A film with a punctuation symbol in its title (Nat'l Punctuation Day, September 24):
A film with a title that starts with the letters Q or R:
A film about pirates (International Talk Like a Pirate Day, September 19):
A film with Native American characters (Native American Day, September 22):
There was a glitch in the matrix, but I just fixed the above link.
HALLOWEEN 4
THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS
(1988, Little)
https://i.imgur.com/nkthZwW.png
"You can't kill damnation, Mister. It don't die like a man dies."
That's how a particularly drunken priest describes "the end of the world, Armageddon" to Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance), something which he claims to have been hunting "for 30 years". In a way, that might mirror Loomis' own quest to hunt Michael Myers, which he describes as "evil on two legs". Ten years ago, he barely stopped him as he tried to kill Laurie Strode. But after being in a coma for a long time, Myers now returns to kill Laurie's daughter, Jamie (Danielle Harris).
Halloween 4 starts with the transfer of Myers from one hospital to another, and his expected eventual escape. With Myers headed to Haddonfield, it is up to Loomis to stop him from murdering Jamie. But this time, he has the help of the townspeople, especially Jamie's foster sister, Rachel (Ellie Cornell).
As we all know, this film came to be because of the failure of Halloween III. With audiences clamoring for the return of Myers, the producers and the studio gave them just that, resulting in what could be seen as a retread of the original film: Myers escapes, goes to Haddonfield, stalks family member, kills random people.
A couple of things separate this installment from the bunch. First, Rachel makes for a pretty good "final girl". She's brave, smart, and resourceful, and manages to hold her own against Michael. Second, despite all the rehashed elements, it is nice to see a "different" Haddonfield, with townsfolk still suffering and reeling in from the events of a decade before. Not that the film dwells too much in it, but it was still nice to see that speck of realism.
However, the film really doesn't have a lot of memorable kills (the only significant ones were added in post-production when the studio deemed the film too tame) which makes it feel a bit neutered. Also, the film tries to insert some level of "mental connection" between Jamie and Michael, but aside from the final shot, I don't think the execution of this plotline was the best. If they had played on that a bit better through the film, the final shot would've been significantly more powerful.
Despite those flaws, Halloween 4 is still a fairly competent slasher with two pretty good leads and a solid ending. It's also nice to see Donald Pleasance still give it his all, despite the shortcomings of the script. He gives such an intense energy to his performance as he relentlessly tries to finish off Michael, even if deep down he knows you can't kill damnaton.
Grade: 3
TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES
MUTANT MAYHEM
(2023, Rowe)
https://i.imgur.com/OeZFUxA.jpg
"Even though it looks like we'll never be accepted, I still think we should try to be heroes."
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles have been around since 1984; from comics and action figures to TV shows, films, and video games. Most of these give prominence to the fact that they're ninjas, because it's cool, and mutants, because well, it's obvious. But few have managed to capture the fact that they're "teenagers" as well as this latest animated outing.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem follows the turtles struggle to stop two different people from getting their hands in the mutagen that mutated them: on one side, there's TCRI executive Cynthia Utrom (Maya Rudolph) who wants to use it for her evil experiments, and on the other hand there's Superfly (Ice Cube), a mutated housefly turned criminal that wants to use it to mutate all creatures and achieve mutant dominance.
But one thing that the turtles have in common with Superfly and his gang are their need for acceptance, which drives their lives and efforts in wildly different directions. Superfly wants vengeance and power, while the turtles want to be friends and coexist. In one of those efforts, they meet student and aspiring journalist April O'Neill (Ayo Edebiri) who, being an outcast herself, accepts them and sets to help them out.
There are a number of things that this film does right, but the main one might be the successful chemistry and vocal performances they pull out from the four main leads (Nicolas Cantu, Brady Noon, Shamon Brown Jr., and Micah Abbey). They talk and behave like teenage kids would; something that the directors and writers noticed and took advantage of by recording many of their scenes together as well as allowing some level of improvisation.
The theme of acceptance and its importance is also well represented across most of the characters. Being teenagers isolated from the rest of the world, it makes sense that the turtles would want to go out, make friends, and have fun. But when you pair it with the fact that they're mutant turtles, it creates an obvious predicament. Their desire to be heroes is fueled by that need for acceptance, until they realize they *should* be heroes to save the world, regardless of whether they're accepted or not.
This project was mostly put forward and driven by Seth Rogen who, along with his frequent collaborator and childhood friend, Evan Goldberg, wrote the script. They also managed to bring along a cast of frequent collaborators (Paul Rudd, Rose Byrne, etc.) for some of the supporting roles which, again, goes to that familiar vibe the film manages to achieve. The whole tone of the film is very loose and fun.
Finally, the film has a very unique animation style, reminiscent of the one used for The Mitchells vs. the Machines, which seems to be a choice of main director Jeff Rowe, who co-directed that film. These style which can vary from very detailed bits to rougher sketch-like scenes goes neatly with the loose tone of the film which makes the end result all the more effective. With this being overall the seventh TMNT film, and with a sequel already in pre-production, looks like these turtles don't have to worry about acceptance.
Grade: 4
PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE
(2002, Anderson)
A film with a punctuation symbol in its title
https://i.imgur.com/uTxxgvV.jpg
"I'm a nice man. I mind my own business. So you tell me 'that's that' before I beat the hell from you."
Adam Sandler started his career in the late 80s, but it wasn't until the mid-90s that he became a household name through a common schtick that featured him as a mild-mannered man prone to violent outbursts in "hilarious" ways. That's basically the template of films like Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, The Wedding Singer, The Waterboy... and then he met Paul Thomas Anderson.
Punch-Drunk Love follows Barry (Sandler), a "nice man" that happens to be socially awkward, depressed and, well, prone to violent outbursts. Things take a turn when he meets Lena (Emily Watson), the charming co-worker of one of his seven sisters, just as he starts being accosted by a phone sex operator that was trying to extort him under orders of his shady boss (Philip Seymour Hoffman).
There's something magical in seeing a gifted director like Paul Thomas Anderson take someone like Sandler and what might seem like a tired schtick and make something as beautiful as this film. Punch-Drunk Love is an earnest romcom about the magic of two seemingly different people meeting each other and learning to work with the other person's strengths and weaknesses for the benefit of the relationship; which is pretty much what Anderson and Sandler did with this.
There is an undeniable charm and innocence to the relationship between Barry and Lena that's just infectious, and both Sandler and Watson portray that beautifully. Sure, there are some moments when Sandler "let's go", but he never orbits too far from Watson, which keeps his performance reined in. Hoffman's performance is, as is usual with him, brilliant but brief, since Anderson never strays too far from Sandler and Watson.
Although part of me wishes the film could've touched a bit more on Barry's depression, the truth is that Punch-Drunk Love is a really simple film; a delightful one! A nice man meets a nice woman, they fall in love, and when struggles come, he overcomes them by threatening to beat the hell out of whoever tries to mess things up, as the two march together hand-in-hand towards the end... and that's that.
Grade: 4.5
Takoma11
09-17-23, 10:42 PM
If you haven't picked for all of your categories:
Featuring a Native American character(s): The Manitou or Smoke Signals.
Pirates: Muppet Treasure Island or for contemporary pirates, A Hijacking.
If you haven't picked for all of your categories:
Featuring a Native American character(s): The Manitou or Smoke Signals.
Pirates: Muppet Treasure Island or for contemporary pirates, A Hijacking.
Nice! I saw a short for the Native American characters category, but I might be open for a full feature. I'll see what those two are about.
I still haven't decided about the pirates one, but I did see A Hijacking a while ago. Thanks!
HALLOWEEN 5
THE REVENGE OF MICHAEL MYERS
(1989, Othenin-Girard)
https://i.imgur.com/TrEEyaa.jpg
"I prayed that he would burn in Hell, but in my heart I knew that Hell would not have him."
That's how Dr. Sam Loomis (Donald Pleasance) describes Michael Myers; "purely and simply evil" he called him in the first film, "evil on two legs" in the fourth one. A malignant force that, after decades, just won't go away because according to him, "Hell would not have him", which explains why he keeps coming back in worse and worse sequels.
Set a year after Halloween 4, Halloween 5 follows Loomis as he realizes once again that Myers is back, once again to try to murder his niece, Jamie Lloyd (Danielle Harris) who is recovering from the trauma of the year before when she attacked her foster mother. That attack is now attributed to a sort of telepathic link with Michael.
This is a film that was rushed into production after the relative "success" of the fourth one, and, even though I really didn't notice or care about it when I first saw it back in the early 90s, it does show in the final product. No official script or director had been chosen even months before the already established release date, and even during filming, producers and writers were wingin' many elements of the story.
One of the many mistakes of the final film is how it brushes off what happens in the end of the previous film, which would've been infinitely more interesting. Instead, the film just feels like a rehash of Part 4 as Jamie is put in danger again and again, while Michael Myers looks for her. The whole story feels more formulaic and pretty much like a checklist to put dumb teenagers in his path to be dispatched.
Another key mistake is the lack of a true "final girl" to latch Jamie to. Rachel, who survived the previous film, comes back acting like a hundred-neurons-less dumber, and is dispatched unceremoniously in the first act; something that is barely addressed, if at all, until the final act. Her best friend, Tina (Wendy Kaplan), sorta takes up the mantle but she's not on screen long enough, and when she is, she's not good enough.
Finally, there are some crumbs dropped through the film about a larger mythology surrounding Michael, evidenced by a previously unseen tattoo on his wrist and by the presence of a mysterious man dressed in black that seems to be following the killer. This crumb becomes a boulder in the very last scene, which paves the way for the inevitable next installment because, of course, Hell would not have him.
Grade: 2
PSYCHO
(1960, Hitchcock)
https://i.imgur.com/ivt24u1.jpg
"I think that we're all in our private traps, clamped in them, and none of us can ever get out. We scratch and we claw, but only at the air, only at each other, and for all of it, we never budge an inch."
As human beings, we're all subject to countless of struggles; whether it is simple temptations or savage impulses that we feel we need to surrender to, or that we simply just can't control. From stealing some much needed money to plain murder, "we all go a little mad sometimes", as Norman Bates says. Those struggles are the basis of Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece.
Psycho follows Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), a real estate secretary that decides to steal $40,000 from her boss perhaps to escape her own private trap, or is she stepping into a new one? While on the run, she stops at the remote Bates Motel, where she encounters owner Norman (Anthony Perkins), who happens to be in his own private trap himself.
I assume there's no need to tiptoe around the plot, but I guess it goes without saying that neither Marion's nor Norman's budged an inch. Instead, their traps end up clamping down on them harder. In the surface, Psycho might seem like a simple film, but in reality, it is an interesting mixture of character study and plot-driven thrills.
This is all thanks to the excellent work of everybody involved. From the richly textured script of Joseph Stefano and the meticulous direction of Hitchcock to the flawless performances of Perkins and Leigh, and everything in between. Psycho is a masterclass in groundbreaking and technically perfect filmmaking.
I've seen Psycho a bunch of times ever since I started getting into films back in the 90s, and I still find myself surprised, impressed, and captivated by everything it offers. Like I'm clamped by it, not able to get out. But then again, I don't wanna.
Grade: 5
LIFTED
(2006, Rydstrom)
https://i.imgur.com/GuznIsC.jpg
"I believe alien life is quite common in the universe, although intelligent life is less so. Some say it has yet to appear on planet Earth."
The above quote from Stephen Hawking pokes a bit of fun at the common belief that alien life must be infinitely superior to ours. But what if aliens were just like us? With the same limitations, struggles for acceptance, and desire to achieve? That is a bit of what is jokingly explored in this Pixar short.
Lifted follows an alien who seems to be undergoing some sort of test to abduct a human farmer using the spaceship's beam and hundreds of buttons. However, abducting a human being is one thing; but doing it under the eye of a strict examiner is another.
At the end of the day, Lifted is a fairly simple short that relies in splastick fun and physical comedy. It does have a nice simple message of tolerance and acceptance for others. I'd say that is way more important than "intelligence"; here or in any planet.
Grade: 3
BAO
(2018, Shi)
https://i.imgur.com/8SIf9bh.jpg
"Sometimes love means letting go when you want to hold on tighter.”
The above quote from writer Melissa Marr captures what some of us might feel wen it's time to let go of someone we love. Sometimes it's a breakup after years together, and sometimes it's seeing that kid we raised leave the nest. The latter is the basis for this weirdly lovely Pixar film.
Bao follows a Chinese-Canadian woman who is baking a batch of bao for her husband, only to realize one of the buns has come to life. The woman then decides to raise the bun as we see "him" go through different phases of life, from a child to a teenager and eventually a young adult.
I caught this short halfway through a couple of months ago as my kids were watching it, and catching it towards the middle without context was quite funny. But as I went back to watch it full, I was charmed by the story and its simplicity, without sacrificing the emotional weight of what it means to "let go".
Grade: 4
For those that listen, a couple of weeks ago, I released the Birthday Loot episode in which I share my thoughts on the "loot" of film recommendations some friends gave to me; from Three O'Clock High to The Conformist and others in between. Check it out here:
The Movie Loot 91: The Birthday Loot (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13552636-the-movie-loot-91-the-birthday-loot.mp3?download=true)
Also available on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/1M0v1J5SQKxX8Y9XxhuKr9?si=a7c41bbf2ca748b9), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-91-the-birthday-loot/id1578191119?i=1000628127530), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzU1MjYzNg?sa=X&ved=0CAgQuIEEahcKEwigqdHaxrmBAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA), and other streaming platforms. Enjoy!
HALLOWEEN
THE CURSE OF MICHAEL MYERS
(1995, Chappelle)
https://i.imgur.com/g0qaI8B.jpg
"This force, this thing that lived inside of him... came from a source too violent, too deadly for you to imagine. It... It grew inside him, contaminating his soul. It was... pure evil."
That's how Sam Loomis (Donald Pleasance) tries to rationalize the nature of Michael Myers. After decades of treating him as a patient, and then trying to stop him as a murderer, NOW it's time to try to figure out where all this is coming from. But, do we really need to know? Do we?? This film apparently thinks we do.
Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers follows up a couple of years after Halloween 5 as Loomis realizes that Michael's existence or evil is the result of scientific experiments performed by members of a druid-like cult trying to investigate and control the power of Thorn... or something like that, who cares. Meanwhile, Michael is out to eliminate family members because, well, that's what he does. Again, who cares.
I remember seeing this back in the day and still thinking it was crap. Rewatching it now, it just confirms that it is. The film is an unnecessary convoluted mess that clearly doesn't understand what made the original film work. Aside from that mess, we have uninteresting characters, as well as yet another unceremonious dispatch of the lead character of the previous two.
Regardless of the mess around him, it is still commendable to see Pleasance give in to the material (which I also said about in Part 5). His performance is a bit of a saving grace in what is essentially a non-sensical mess. This, paired with Paul Rudd's odd performance, might make for an interestingly odd watch.
Another interesting aspect is that halfway through, I realized I was watching the Producer's Cut, which has some significant differences to the Theatrical Cut in the last act. So from the perspective of a cinephile and a horror fan, I still got some slight enjoyment in seeing all this unfold, even if the end result is unnecessary, frustrating, and ultimately disappointing.
Grade: 1.5
SHIMÁSÁNI
(2009, Lowe)
A film with Native American characters
https://i.imgur.com/rMWcPiE.png
"Where is there a place without meanness?"
From the 17th Century through the beginning of the 20th Century, American Indian boarding schools were established across the United States to "civilize" Native Americans by essentially erasing their culture and way of life. Native Americans were often ridiculed because of their language or beliefs in an effort to make them embrace "American" culture. That is why one of the main characters of this powerful short refuses to go to school. "They're mean", she says prompting the above retort from her grandmother.
Set in 1934, Shimásáni follows two sisters (Brigadier and Noelle Brown) standing at a cultural crossroad. Because of the needs in the household, only one of them has been chosen to attend school while the other has to stay to tend the goats and the crops under the watchful eye of their strict grandmother (Carmelita B. Lowe). The die has been cast for both, and both hate the fate that has been chosen for each. But when the second one gets her hand in her sister's school book, she finds herself drawn and mesmerized by the outside world she might never know.
Found this short mostly by chance in a list of films with Native American characters made by Native American people, and it certainly left an impression. From the stark black and white cinematography to the powerful message in its story. A story that puts this two sisters between fate and free will trying to choose between the fate that has been chosen for them and the fate that they want. Is there meanness at the end of both roads? I guess that's something that they will have to find for themselves.
Grade: 4.5
For anyone interested, here is the article where I found the link...
Native American Heritage Month: 7 Films to Illuminate Diverse Experiences (https://variety.com/2020/film/news/native-american-heritage-month-films-billy-luther-1234819161/)
PHOENIX74
09-21-23, 02:38 AM
I never got to The Curse of Michael Myers - I'd been too thoroughly bored by the series at that time. I remember being excited about Halloween 4 around the time it was coming out, and I guess initially I actually liked it, watching it with friends a few times - but every Halloween film after the first three has been the same monotonous grind. Except for Halloween Ends, which finally went in a different direction, but was also ultimately terrible.
I never got to The Curse of Michael Myers - I'd been too thoroughly bored by the series at that time. I remember being excited about Halloween 4 around the time it was coming out, and I guess initially I actually liked it, watching it with friends a few times - but every Halloween film after the first three has been the same monotonous grind. Except for Halloween Ends, which finally went in a different direction, but was also ultimately terrible.
Yeah, it's been mostly downhill since. I still haven't seen the new trilogy, but those are the next ones I'm going to tackle to finish up the franchise.
RED ROCK WEST
(1993, Dahl)
A film with a title that starts with Q or R
https://i.imgur.com/Aem9VIa.jpg
"You're a nice guy, aren't you, Michael?"
"I try to be."
Red Rock West follows Michael (Nicolas Cage), a drifter desperately looking for a job in rural Wyoming. In the process, he finds himself in the middle of a misunderstanding when a bar owner (J.T. Walsh) mistakes him for a hitman he hired to murder his wife (Lara Flynn Boyle). Things get even more complicated when the actual hitman (Dennis Hopper) arrives and stumbles upon Michael.
Michael is, essentially, a "nice guy" and the film makes a point of letting us know that he is. From his unwillingness to hide an injury that costs him a job or his inability to steal some money from an unsupervised cash register to endanger himself by going back into Red Rock to warn the wife, Suzanne, that her husband, Wayne, wanted to have her killed. It is that conversation the one that prompts the above quoted response from her.
It is perhaps that "niceness" what ends up getting Michael in more and more trouble. Once he enters Red Rock, every "nice" action he does ends up sinking him deeper into the mess. The film has a few twists and a certain grit to it that just makes it work, in addition to its neo-noir vibe, which reminds me of classic film noirs like Detour or maybe even D.O.A. to some extent.
Cage has always done a great job portraying vulnerable guys that are cornered into complicated situations all while trying to come afloat and still be "nice". He's also paired with a solid supporting cast, with Hopper easily having the meatier role. His performance as Lyle (from Dallas) is not equal to Frank Booth, but it's somewhere in that area. Walsh and Boyle are both pretty good too.
It's possible that I rented this film back in the 1990s, but I can't remember. So when a good friend recommended it to me, it was nice to follow through and finally catch up with it.
Grade: 4
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
(2016, LEMMiNO)
https://i.imgur.com/ZrAgb87.png
"If AI becomes more competent in every regard, then what purpose or function would be left for us to serve?"
Artificial Intelligence is a 12-minute short produced by YouTube creator LEMMiNO. In it, he analyzes the development and growth of artificial intelligence, and how it can pose a threat to us. From seemingly inconsequential things like computers beating expert players in chess or Go, to the development of AI-generated content in news media or even music.
Even though the short was released in 2016, that last part might seem very timely, considering the points of contention in the ongoing writer's strike in Hollywood. The replacement of voice actors or session/studio musicians looks like something that can be coming on the next corner, if it isn't already here.
The content of the short is fairly simple, but well structured, and although it doesn't really aim to reach any wide-ranging conclusion, it does raise interesting questions. This is the second short I see from this young creator, but I might check out more of his work.
Grade: 3
HALLOWEEN H20
20 YEARS LATER
(1998, Miner)
https://i.imgur.com/OClisVn.jpg
"If you want to stay handcuffed to your dead brother, that's fine. But you're not dragging me along. Not anymore."
Back in 1978, John Carpenter came with a simple idea for a horror film – a killer on the loose relentlessly pursuing a babysitter – and in the process revolutionized horror. He was described as "pure evil" or the "boogeyman" himself, and anybody could've been a victim. This time, it just happened to be Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis).
However, when the inevitable sequel came along, it was decided to move the story "forward" that Laurie and Michael Myers were siblings, giving some sort of motive for his killing spree, but also stripping the film from its terrifying randomness. Nonetheless, that has been the backbone of the franchise all through its sequels, essentially "handcuffing" Michael to either Laurie or her offspring (i.e. Jamie Lloyd) and most would say, dragging it all along.
20 years later, Michael is back looking for his sister, ignoring all the sequels in between. Halloween H20 follows the attempts from Laurie, who now runs a private academy under the name of Keri Tate, to finally stop Michael while protecting his teenage son John (Josh Hartnett). He is the one who says the above quote to Laurie, trying to snap her out of the traumas and ghosts of her past, which we know will become her present AND future again.
Fortunately, Halloween H20 ends up being a fairly competent slasher and probably one of the best entries of the franchise. To see Jamie Lee Curtis take on the role again, balancing the terror and fear of his brother with a newfound resourcefulnes is quite good. Hartnett is also pretty solid as her son, and although most of the supporting cast end up being bodies for Michael to dispose of, they're mostly likable and enjoyable to watch interact.
But aside of performances, I think this is a film that survives thanks to some pretty good direction. The way that Miner shoots Myers, and also how stuntman Chris Durant moves in the role, feels a bit more savage, a bit more angry, and I think that adds to the tension, especially in the second half. Most of the kills are also pretty good, which is always a positive in a horror film.
I think Miner's direction peaks in a pretty nerve-wracking scene when Michael is chasing John and his girlfriend right to the front door culminating in the inevitable sibling face-off pictured above. The scene is reminiscent of the edge-of-your-seat chase scene from the original, and feels like it brings the whole pathos of Laurie's character full circle. Jamie has gone on to play her four more times, so like it or not, she's handcuffed to this character and to her "dead brother". At least this one's worth a watch.
Grade: 3.5
TREASURE ISLAND
(1950, Haskin)
A film about pirates
https://i.imgur.com/Mexgxsl.jpg
"Aye, Jim, you're the spitting image of me when I was your age. Head full of pirates. But he'll find, same as I, that the sea be mostly hard work; and the biggest satisfaction a man gets is doing his duty."
Based on the novel of Robert Louis Stevenson, Treasure Island follows the adventures of young Jim Hawkins (Bobby Driscoll) as he embarks on a sea journey for a lost pirate treasure. What he doesn't know is that most of the crew accompanying him are pirates led by the treacherous Long John Silver (Robert Newton). It is him who says the above quote when he fears that young Hawkins might be onto him.
I seem to remember having a Disney audio LP of Treasure Island when I was a kid (along with The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, The Aristocats, and The Rescuers). It was in Spanish so I don't remember if it was from this version, but I suppose it must've been. Either way, I always enjoyed listening to it as a kid. Watching it now as an adult, it was a whole different experience but still fun nonetheless.
The fights between the pirates and the good guys are well choreographed and staged. One of the things that surprised me, though, was how "violent" the film was, at least for a Disney film that's labeled as a family film. Not that it bothered me, but it surprised me. There were a fair share of close-up shootings and stabbings with knives and swords, but it made for a more thrilling experience.
The relationship between Hawkins and Long John Silver is interesting, and Newton is clearly having a lot of fun with the role. Driscoll is also pretty good, but I feel like there needed to be a bit more to make me believe the kid would go to the lengths he goes to help the pirate. On the other hand, I think the film needed stronger characters on the "good side" to help balance things out. Squire Trelawney is a bit of a fool and Dr. Livesey is too bland.
But putting those quibbles aside, the film was well made and most importantly, very entertaining. As I set to find a film about pirates for this category, I knew I wanted to focus on this era (1940s and 1950s) because I was sure that some classic swashbuckling action would be a good choice. But that's how I am, head full of pirates; and the biggest satisfaction Disney might get is doing their duty.
Grade: 3
SOUTH OF THE BORDER
(2009, Stone)
A film from Oliver Stone
https://i.imgur.com/0VYkBvP.png
"There is a pendulum to history, these things change."
Since the late 19th Century, the United States has been involved in numerous regime changes in Latin America; sometimes actively, others not so much. Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Fulgencio Batista in Cuba, the Somozas in Nicaragua, Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay, military interventions in Haiti, Panama, and even Puerto Rico, to name a few. But there is a pendulum to history, these things change.
South of the Border follows director Oliver Stone as he travels through different countries in Latin America, investigating the shift to the left within many countries of the region towards the beginning of the 21st Century; the so-called "pink tide". In the process, Stone meets with leaders like Hugo Chavez (Venezuela), Raúl Castro (Cuba), Evo Morales (Bolivia), Lula da Silva (Brazil), and several others.
It is not a secret that Stone has a certain agenda. He doesn't hide it, so it's there for everybody to see. He has been a hard-core critic of U.S. government, the establishment, and a firm detractor of President Bush, among other things. Take from that what you may as you watch this documentary, but he still does a great job of presenting facts in a neat package. The rise of leftist governments was indeed surprising and I suppose worrisome to the U.S. establishment.
As someone who has lived through the sh!tty foreign policies of the United States and their sh!tty practics, I can recognize very well when what Stone's presenting holds up. He's clearly taking a risk by putting himself beside such hated figures like Chavez and Castro, but I'm sure he knows it very well. Still, those that can look beyond that, and are willing to listen to "the other side", will probably come out of this with a broader perspective of the world.
But there's a pendulum to history, these things change. Most of that tide that rose up in the beginning of the century has receded, and ironically, most of the leaders interviewed here have either passed away, or have already left their seats; many of them with criminal charges, dubious or not, that have threatened or completely damaged their political careers. Again, take from that what you may, but there's a pendulum to history, these things change.
Grade: 3.5
HALLOWEEN
RESURRECTION
(2002, Rosenthal)
https://i.imgur.com/jc2WrL5.png
"It's all fake. We've been set up. You knew you didn't have a show anyone would watch... so you set us all up at our fu¢king expense, huh?"
Halloween: Resurrection opens up three years after the events of H20, with Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) committed at an institution after realizing that the man she killed at the end of that movie was not her brother, Michael Myers, but an innocent paramedic, "father of three". This 15-minute opening sequence is competently directed and neatly acted by Curtis and the nurses that tend to her. But then the real movie starts.
The rest of the film has nothing to do with Laurie. Instead, it follows the crew of a reality show called Dangertainment, as they prepare to film a group of young volunteers that will spend the night at the abandoned Myers house. What they don't know is that, after Michael's encounter with Laurie, he has returned home and he doesn't like visitors.
The things I do for podcasting! Certainly the reputation of this film precedes it, so I knew that most people consider it s-hit, which is why I had pretty much avoided it all these years. But in preparing myself for a Halloween episode at a friend's podcast, I wanted to dive into every single film, so now I can say I watched this.
Granted, I had seen the opening already on YouTube, as well as Busta Rhymes "kung fu fighting" Michael in the end, because yeah, this film stars Busta Rhymes, and he "kung fu fights" with Michael in the end. That alone should probably adjust your bearings to what was to come, and still I think it's not enough.
Putting aside how ludicrous the logistics of this alleged show are, the film has very little to offer. Characters are paper-thin, the film doesn't really bring anything new to the franchise lore or themes, but rather just unleashes Michael Myers in a house full of meat bags for him to slice through. Oh, and did I mention that Busta Rhymes "kung fu fights" Michael Myers in the end?
In addition, the film is full of loose strands that lead nowhere. Tyra Banks is all over the promos and yet, she's in probably two scenes alone. Also, the main girl (Bianca Kajlich) for some wild reason lets go a sonic scream in her audition that trashes glasses and equipment, only to have that never be brought up again EVER.
But did I mention Busta Rhymes? Let's be honest, he is both the worst and best thing in this film, and for the exact same reasons. It's as if the guy was teleported from a whole different film, landed here, and screamed "OK, let's do thiss!!". His performance and dialogue are pretty bad, including a ham-fisted monologue he has in the end; but at the same time, I won't deny I was cackling as I watched him loose in the middle of this mess.
Busta alone warrants half a star, while the other half goes for a Peeping Tom reference in the first act that I like to think was intentionally clever, but seeing the amount of effort that was put in the rest of the film makes me wonder if it was just a wild coincidence. The truth is that Halloween: Resurrection didn't really resurrect much.
If you look at the poster and the trailers, Jamie Lee Curtis is featured prominently. Luckily for her, she bails out after 15 minutes, making us feel like we've been set up. The producers knew they didn't have a film anyone would watch, so they set us all up with Jamie Lee Curtis in a solid opening, only to feed us Busta Rhymes "kung fu fighting" Michael Myers.
Grade: 1
HALLOWEEN
(2018, Green)
https://i.imgur.com/6T7189y.jpg
"He's waited for this night... he's waited for me... I've waited for him..."
It is rumored that when Jamie Lee Curtis was approached for H20, she was interested in exploring the trauma that her character had gone through as a result of the events in the original film. There are definitely hints of that in that film, but then again, there's also a scene where she's opening up about her past to her boyfriend, while he's more interested in undressing her, which seems like a pretty accurate analogy for the franchise. Another 20 years later, and it seems that writer/director David Gordon Green listened to her.
This new Halloween is a direct sequel to the original, ignoring all of the other sequels and most importantly, ignoring the twist that had Laurie and Michael as siblings; something that has pretty much shaped the franchise since Halloween II. But, like a character says in this film, "is scary to have a bunch of your friends get butchered by some random crazy person". Allowing Michael to be a random killer on the loose is scarier than tying his actions to a specific family or place.
Turns out that Michael was captured and institutionalized shortly after the events on the first film, leaving Laurie to reckon with the trauma of what she experienced. As a result, she lives in a fortified house in the middle of nowhere where she practices with multiple weapons, while having a strained relationship with her daughter Karen (Judy Greer). Only her granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak) reaches out to her and seems to care for her.
But all that trauma bubbles up and explodes when Michael is set to be transferred to a new facility and, of course, escapes triggering Laurie's survival mode. One of the most interesting aspects from the film is how it illustrates the duality between both Michael and Laurie. At one point, Dr. Sartain (a.k.a. Loomis 2.0) comments on how they're both kept alive by "the notion of being a predator or the fear of becoming prey".
Of course, Michael was institutionalized in a facility, but Laurie was as captive as him because of the trauma. That duality is evident in the script, but also in the direction. Green does a lot of interesting things to portray that duality, by visually referencing the events of the original, especially in the last act. The character of Karen is also interesting as we see her also reckoning with her traumas, directly caused by her mother's traumas, so it's an interesting illustration of the effects of traumatic experiences.
But aside of those layers, this is simply put, a pretty good and relentless horror film. The way that Michael moves and kills without remorse is extremely effective, and the gore is plentiful. So it's good to see a horror film that knows how to deliver in both fronts. This is probably more along the lines of what Jamie Lee Curtis was expecting 20 years ago, so it's nice to see Green deliver it for her. We might say she was waiting for him.
Grade: 4
HALLOWEEN KILLS
(2021, Green)
https://i.imgur.com/qvdEwhM.png
"Michael Myers has haunted this town for 40 years. Tonight, we hunt him down."
Set immediately after the events of Halloween (2018), Halloween Kills follows the efforts of the people of Haddonfield, as they try to stop Michael Myers once and for all. After escaping from his fiery cage from the previous film, Myers goes on a brutal rampage through town. Meanwhile, Karen (Judy Greer) and Allyson (Andi Matichak) deal with the aftermath in different ways, as Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) recovers from her wounds at the hospital.
This film was quite a wild ride, starting with the fact that it was bloody and brutal as f**k. The film has probably the most intense kills in the franchise, and maybe some of the most intense that I've seen in a "mainstream" horror film. When I wrote about Halloween (2018), I brought up how relentless Michael was; well, here they amped that up to 11, so if blood and gore is what you're looking for in a horror film, there's plenty here.
Another thing I appreciated, which is something I highlighted from Halloween 4 as well, was how the film shows a Haddonfield that's different from the 1978 one. This is a town that is still reeling in from being haunted by Myers 40 years ago, which makes their efforts to hunt him down feel real and understandable. Unfortunately, the film tries to send a message about the consequences of "mob mentality", but does so in a clumsy and awkward way.
"Evil dies tonight!" becomes the zombie-like chant of the residents as they mindlessly charge through hospital hallways and neighborhood streets. Although I respect the intentions and goals of this, it really could've used a bit of a do-over as far as how it is written and integrated. As it is, several characters like survivor Tommy Doyle (Anthony Michael Hall) or lead character Laurie are forced to recite heavy-handed, ham-fisted monologues about the evil of Michael Myers.
Despite the issues with the dialogue, things are kept afloat because of the committed performances from pretty much everybody, including Hall who brings an intensity to his character that even had me rooting for him at times. I also liked how, with Laurie confined to a hospital bed most of the time (a bit of an homage to Halloween II?), Karen essentially becomes the reluctant hero. This obviously adds a lot of weight to what happens in the end, which caught me off guard in a good way.
I'm really torn about this film because what I liked, I liked a lot; maybe even more than Halloween (2018)... but I can't deny the film has issues with its dialogue, and the execution of its goals regarding Michael and the town he has haunted for 40 years. How this mob tries to hunt him down might be clumsy, storywise and scriptwise, but I enjoyed watching them "kills".
Grade: 3.5
For those that listen, in the latest episode of The Movie Loot, The Long Loot, me and Jason Kleeberg (host of Force Five Podcast) talk about long takes in film. In the end, we share our Top 5 Long Takes. Check it out here:
The Movie Loot 92: The Long Loot (with Jason from Force Five Podcast) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13683070-the-movie-loot-92-the-long-loot-with-jason-from-force-five-podcast.mp3?download=true)
Also available on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/534ZHSF7yKKxSwEzi6qt12?si=a0306593e3324279), Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-92-the-long-loot-with-jason-from/id1578191119?i=1000629742596), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzY4MzA3MA?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwjo37zQ39KBAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQNg), and other streaming platforms.
Enjoy!
HALLOWEEN ENDS
(2022, Green)
https://i.imgur.com/kABP08a.jpg
"You're just a man in a Halloween mask. What are you gonna do now?"
In 1978, Halloween was released unleashing the evil of Michael Myers into the world. 40+ years and 12 films after, the franchise has tried to explain the source of that evil. Is it all in the family or in an evil corporation? Is it because of abuse or other external circumstances? Does it come from a Druid cult or is it always within us?
Since David Gordon Green took over the franchise in 2018, he has avoided answering the question and in that, perhaps answering it in a different way. What if he's "just a man in a Halloween mask"? A man that has surfaced and resurfaced three times wreaking havoc in Haddonfield, but "just a man in a Halloween mask" anyway. And just when you think evil has died, it comes back or changes shape.
That new shape is kind of what Green presents in this film, as he introduces Corey Cunningham (Rohan Campbell), a nerdy teen that is dealing with his own traumas and inner demons. Meanwhile, Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) is trying to rebuild her life along with her granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak) after the events from Michael Myers' last killing spree.
Corey's own journey of being bullied and turned into a pariah leads him down two roads: first, it leads him to the caring hands of Allyson, who is now a nurse, as the two begin a relationship (much to Laurie's chagrin), but it also brings him face to face with an aging and ailing Michael; an encounter which perhaps sparks something inside him making "evil change shape".
It's not hard to understand why this film had such a polarizing reaction. The introduction of a new character that ends up being so important, paired with the lack of Michael Myers for roughly 40-50 minutes should've been notable turn-offs for hardcore fans. Something that I'm pretty sure Green knew beforehand, to the point that he even used the same distinct title font from Halloween III: Season of the Witch, yet another installment that was initially (or still?) polarizing to hardcore fans for its alternate story and its lack of Michael Myers.
I applaud Green and Co. for having a defined vision and story arc, and sticking to it. That doesn't mean it was well executed all the way, or make it any less muddled, but I have more respect for that than for what had been done with the franchise before where every film seemed to reinvent the rules and sources of this evil, from evil corporations to Druid cults. Here, it's "just a man in a Halloween mask".
After we're introduced to this Corey storyline, the second act does bring back Michael Myers, and does end the story of Laurie and Michael in a very definitive way (at least for this continuity timeline). But it does leave that lingering thought that "evil changes shape". What are they gonna do now?
Grade: 2
A GIRL ALONE IN A HOUSE
(2018, Jones)
https://i.imgur.com/qObyNAs.png
"Johnnie Marat is dead. I killed him."
A home invasion is most definitely a traumatic event. Victims have often confessed being haunted by nightmares about the attack, and reliving the events constantly thinking "what could I have done differently that night?" or "how can I prevent this from happening again?". That seems to be what's behind this neat, sleek short film.
A Girl Alone in a House follows Charlotte (Kitzia Jimenez), a young woman still reeling from an attack some time before. When she's asked to house-sit for a friend during July 4th, Charlotte finds herself again alone in a house, haunted by the memories of the past attack and the possibilities of it reoccurring. But this time, she's more prepared.
This is a really cool 18-minute short, featuring some neat camerawork and a committed performance from Jimenez. There is a very effective use of the space of the house and its different rooms. It also succeeds in transmitting the fear of the lead character, but also her resourcefulness to not be a victim again. After all, Johnnie Marat is dead. She killed him.
Grade: 4
WARPAINT
(2020, Jones)
https://i.imgur.com/BLeRIPA.png
"If you can't remember who you hurt, you'll never see us coming."
Warpaint follows a mysterious woman (Kitzia Jimenez) seeking revenge against a man that hurt her. There's something to be said about a 2-minute short that can carry so much inferred story into its short runtime. This is a perfect example of that since you pretty much know everything you need to know about both characters in those 2 minutes.
The camerawork is really effective, but it is Jimenez who sells it as she waltzes through the house in a sort of victory dance. There is a resolve in her eyes that not every actress can transmit. Plus, the few lines of dialogue she has are sharp, fun, and well delivered.
Grade: 4
Deschain
10-02-23, 05:36 PM
WARPAINT
(2020, Jones)
https://i.imgur.com/BLeRIPA.png
Warpaint follows a mysterious woman (Kitzia Jimenez) seeking revenge against a man that hurt her. There's something to be said about a 2-minute short that can carry so much inferred story into its short runtime. This is a perfect example of that since you pretty much know everything you need to know about both characters in those 2 minutes.
The camerawork is really effective, but it is Jimenez who sells it as she waltzes through the house in a sort of victory dance. There is a resolve in her eyes that not every actress can transmit. Plus, the few lines of dialogue she has are sharp, fun, and well delivered.
Grade: 4
Is this MKS’s movie? I think he showed it to me when it first came out. Real solid stuff.
Is this MKS’s movie? I think he showed it to me when it first came out. Real solid stuff.
Yeah, those last two are from him. I had seen A Girl Alone in a House before, but I don't think I had seen this one.
For those interested...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYZMm0eG-1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCPeOU0vm74
SpelingError
10-02-23, 07:40 PM
A GIRL ALONE IN A HOUSE
(2018, Jones)
WARPAINT
(2020, Jones)
I heard the director is a complete whacko, but I agree that the shorts are both very good.
https://media.tenor.com/_ltopfIVIXIAAAAC/nutbag-seven.gif
Here's my summary for SEPTEMBER 2023:
A film from Oliver Stone (born September 15): South of the Border (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413618-south_of_the_border.html)
A film with a punctuation symbol in its title (Nat'l Punctuation Day, September 24): Punch-Drunk Love (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412180-punch-drunk_love.html)
A film with a title that starts with the letters Q or R: Red Rock West (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412940-red_rock_west.html)
A film about pirates (International Talk Like a Pirate Day, September 19): Treasure Island (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413425-treasure_island.html) (1950)
A film with Native American characters (Native American Day, September 22): Shimásáni (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412812-shimsn.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/8JwbicUe7NsPk6azviHzUGpXT41.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/vT2CXIsVKoGl0DZ8USwLWzEFznI.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ewofUEqU3Gpr7WSgSz3TEVPIfBg.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/zPzBsQZ2EhSmO9FLvQQtWVkJqRu.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/xsCu7aiunBoliIfSxv2KSu5HzhL.jpg
Other films seen, not for the challenge
Halloween films: Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2410757-halloween-4-the-return-of-michael-myers.html), Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412315-halloween_5_the_revenge_of_michael_myers.html), Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412750-halloween_the_curse_of_michael_myers.html), Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413075-halloween_h20_20_years_later.html), Halloween: Resurrection (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413631-halloween_resurrection.html), Halloween (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413701-halloween.html) (2018), Halloween Kills (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2413913-halloween_kills.html)
Theater outing: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2410964-teenage_mutant_ninja_turtles_mutant_mayhem.html)
Pixar short films: Lifted (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412408-lifted.html), Bao (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412412-bao.html)
Short films: A Girl Alone in a House (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2415161-a_girl_alone_in_a_house.html), Warpaint (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2415172-warpaint.html)
Other watches: Psycho (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2412352-psycho.html)
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/eFSOkXF9n9hsfGv45MDsPixiOyx.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/rYvP6yMXCIVHnkVtwGaAXFmpzkB.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/noCnM8nEI2bEDSdKHh0RKbwBwbC.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/lqLXUm3oK59sGJKRH2Zjj2m3iMg.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/1mlKwbNzJCGzqe4i0ZEJtUUL290.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/f7JAX5EGk4GgsEnus6OxyzwpFp7.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/4CclCDyQXBBgz62Qtp3CoflQE5g.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/q06saepaXeBdkMibuN4R2fXmgIw.jpg
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/ueO9MYIOHO7M1PiMUeX74uf8fB9.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/iwI3R8ZR3MQ5dnTx9tHSiS81i4W.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/tKz7XRXvdy1i7pW4eotaWZSrAx2.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/slEfSYzo8nqP9qkli0zSSVgg2pf.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/sup7v11BPrncfNY1eGfNgnTGVyM.jpg https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w600_and_h900_bestv2/yz4QVqPx3h1hD1DfqqQkCq3rmxW.jpg
A lot of stuff, but my favorites were Punch-Drunk Love and Shimásáni. Some good stuff with Red Rock West and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem as well. The Halloween binge was surely a rollercoaster, but I would say I was satisfied with the DGG trilogy, even if Halloween Ends didn't fully land with me.
My least favorite was easily Halloween Resurrection, no doubt about it.
Time to share my latest "assignment" episode!
The Movie Loot: The October Assignment (with Lindsay Washburn) (https://www.buzzsprout.com/850063/13747304-the-movie-loot-the-october-assignment-with-lindsay-washburn.mp3?download=true)
In this one, I'm joined by Lindsay Washburn, actress and YouTube film critic, to choose a set of 5 horrific categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.
You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube
here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6molHMC-_s)
...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-movie-loot-the-october-assignment/id1578191119?i=1000630768252), Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/episode/14t4lotHf6JgIH1YrLlptL?si=26201f1425584dbd), Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS84NTAwNjMucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC0xMzc0NzMwNA?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwiosIXgs-qBAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQNg), or any other.
Here are the criteria we chose for OCTOBER 2023:
A film written and/or directed by Clive Barker (born October 5):
A film about a reptile (Nat'l Reptile Awareness Day, October 21):
Any film version of Frankenstein (Nat'l Frankenstein Friday, October 27):
A disaster movie (Int'l Day for Disaster Reduction, October 13):
A film from Nigeria (Independence Day, October 1):
THE MEG
(2018, Turteltaub)
https://i.imgur.com/HW8Frzs.jpg
"Meg versus man isn't a fight... it's a slaughter."
Megalodon is an extinct species of shark that measured around 60 feet (three times the size of a great white shark). Thought to have existed 2.6 million years ago, there isn't much evidence about interactions between them and primitive humans, but given their size and strength, it doesn't take a paleontologist to know the end result would be, well, a slaughter. But meg versus Statham? That's a whole different question.
The Meg follows Jonas Taylor (Statham), a rescue diver that has gone into exile after a previous mission resulted in the death of two crew members. But when a team of researchers led by some of Taylor's former co-workers stumble upon a living megalodon, Taylor has to jump back into action mode to kick some shark's ass.
That's more or less the amount of thought you can expect was put into the film. Just a bunch of people trying to stop a big shark from eating a bunch of people. Sadly, the film doesn't seem to fully commit neither to the serious biological aspects of the premise, nor to the chomp-chomp, silly angle it could've gone with, which leaves the film in a weird middle ground that's not very satisfying.
The Meg is not without its moments. There are a few thrilling sequences in the water, but they are mostly scattered with some lulls in between. Also, if you're looking for chomping gore, there is little of it as most of the kills come as a result of sudden gulps of entire humans. This results in a lot of unexpected jumpscares, some of which are more effective than others.
Finally, although the cast is decent and there is some good banter between them, Statham doesn't really have a lot of chemistry with his female leads. I also find it funny how we are led to believe that Statham has become a "drunken loner" after the events of the prologue, only to brush that aside as soon as he hits the water because, of course, he's Statham and we know that meg versus Statham isn't a fight... it's a slaughter; a meg slaughter.
Grade: 2.5
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.