Okay's Thoughts on Okay Films

→ in
Tools    





movies can be okay...
Dunkirk (2017) by Christopher Nolan

"Dunkirk" is a very tense experience from beginning to end, and this is mostly attributable to Hans Zimmer's phenomenal score, that keeps holding the stakes and the feeling of urgency at an all time high. Because of it, I was genuinely nervous throughout the majority of the movie. Christopher Nolan, being the master he is, goes to extreme lengths to achieve his goals, and this shows with his commitment to present all of the crazy action as realistically as possible.

There isn't much wrong about the film, and this comes as no surprise when we're talking about such an experienced director. Although, I was left confused during a few points of the movie, because of its unique presentation and order of the occurring events. Also, the PG-13 rating does in fact hurt a couple of scenes where the restraint of gore is very noticeable. Other than that, this is nothing short of a great film, and I'm very jealous of whoever had the pleasure of seeing it on the big screen.

⭐⭐⭐1/2
__________________
"A film has to be a dialogue, not a monologue — a dialogue to provoke in the viewer his own thoughts, his own feelings. And if a film is a dialogue, then it’s a good film; if it’s not a dialogue, it’s a bad film."
- Michael "Gloomy Old Fart" Haneke



movies can be okay...
The Shape of Water (2017) by Guillermo del Toro

My experience while watching this magical film was very special. I was extremely engrossed in its fairytale universe, and filled with joy while watching the fabulous characters interactions. I truly believe that Sally Hawkins not only gives the best performance of her career, but hands down the best one of the whole year. Seeing the way she portrays her mute character simply left me in awe. The way she successfully and subtly manipulates her facial expressions and body language, in order to give form to her emotions, was an absolute honour to witness. I even remember how connected I felt to her character, just 5 minutes into the movie. Obviously, a huge credit goes to Guillermo del Toro, for writing not only her character, but the whole movie so elegantly and eloquently.

Speaking of the director, he is a damn phenom! I say this because he is able to craft his vision in a way that relies on the medium of film, to the greatest extent. The cinematography, the score, the story...they all are perfectly synchronized, shaping a pretty great film in all aspects. While this indeed probably will rank among my very top films of 2017, it doesn't get the top spot. This is mainly due to the the movie's final act, where the absurdities elevate to a higher level. Contrary to the rest of the film, where I accepted any absurdity as apart of the style the director was going for, since they indeed did help at amplifying the fairytale taste that the film had. But later on, I don't think that fine line between helping the tone of the film, and turning the happenings into random ridiculousness, was respected. Either way, my issues with "The Shape of Water" are clearly negligible, and I'm very happy with how it came out overall.

🌟🌟🌟🌟



You can't win an argument just by being right!
Another review that really makes me want to see this, Okay! Lovely read.



movies can be okay...
I'm on the verge of being finished with all of the 2017 movies I planned to go through, so I'm excited to get back to my usual routine, and watching the films I postponed for these.



movies can be okay...
Furthermore, I don't think I explained my issue with the last act of "The Shape of Water" as well as I could. I didn't dislike it just because of what I said. It also became too conventional and predictable for my liking, which you know, is totally fine for what the movie is trying to be, but I expected a more clever ending, and I'm not talking about the last shot, that was fantastic.



movies can be okay...
What's your favourite of 2017 so far? The Killing of a Sacred Deer?
It's between that, or "Loveless", or "It Comes at Night". Those are my top 3 for sure.



Keep your station clean - OR I WILL KILL YOU
It's between that, or "Loveless", or "It Comes at Night". Those are my top 3 for sure.
I loved It Comes at Night, that is the definition of building tension through a slow paced film.



It's between that, or "Loveless", or "It Comes at Night". Those are my top 3 for sure.
Loveless is up there for me. I forgot all about It Comes At Night because it was out so early in the year, have to see it as i loved Krisha.



movies can be okay...
I loved It Comes at Night, that is the definition of building tension through a slow paced film.
Agreed. It's remarkable that this tension is held throughout the entirety of the film.



movies can be okay...
Loveless is up there for me. I forgot all about It Comes At Night because it was out so early in the year, have to see it as i loved Krisha.
I don't know if it is better than "Krisha", but I sure do immensely love both films.



movies can be okay...
La Ciénaga (2001) by Lucrecia Martel

The best way to introduce this film is by talking about its grotesque opening sequence, where all of the focal points of the movie are summed up, visually and audibly. The way sound especially is utilised, not only during this opening scene, but throughout the entirety of the film, is nothing short of mesmerizing. The creaking of the chairs, the shaking of the glass, the screaming of nature...they all help at constructing a tense and dreadful atmosphere. Not to mention, this is the director's first feature, so the fact that this level of meticulous sound design is what we're being subjected to, is quite the major accomplishment.

After a particular accident that kicks off the movie, we basically follow two close Argentinian families and their reactions to this event, which leads to their interaction, and that's pretty much what the film is about from the surface looking in. But in reality, the experience of actually watching it, and delving into it, is as limitless as its depth. As I'm remembering certain scenes right now, I keep admiring what Lucrecia Martel accomplishes with so little. This is a movie where a filthy pool, a lot of wine, a messy house, and a disgusting environment, are all also main characters, and these images are crafted in a way that will stick in my subconscious, until I revisit the film again, which I sure will do.

🌟🌟🌟🌟



movies can be okay...
The Disaster Artist (2017) by James Franco

Of course I had to see "The Disaster Artist" sooner or later, since it's based on one of my genuinely favourite films of all time. Now that I've seen it, I'm not as disappointed as I thought I would be, in fact, I more or less loved the experience I got from watching it. With that being said, my enjoyment came solely and strictly from James Franco's portrayal of Tommy Wiseau. He truly is the only source of comedy, and he sure did deliver in that regard. Other than that, the movie is totally flat and bland, and I actually doubt I would of even finished the movie, had Franco's performance not been as good as it was. The only other aspect of the film that I was impressed by in the slightest, was the recreated scenes from "The Room", and it sure shows that a lot of work went into how they turned out. Overall, this is a very enjoyable movie, but I can already imagine myself disliking it more and more on repeated viewings.

⭐⭐⭐1/2



movies can be okay...
Interiors (1978) by Woody Allen


While watching "Interiors", images of the influential Bergman kept popping up in my head, but the actual quality of the film never came close to what it is trying to pay homage to. A lot of the dialogue gave off a sense of importance that the film itself couldn't live up to, and it also doesn't help that none of the actors gave good enough performances, to at least take any of their "deep" thoughts and conversations seriously. I honestly think the movie would of been much better had it took a step back, and reserved itself at least a little bit, and I say this because of the repeating structure of the majority of the scenes. Basically, a scene would start out normally and casually, then it would unnaturally escalate into a petty back and forth fight. Rinse, repeat, and that's the whole movie for you, and it gets pretty annoying.

As for the positives, they're just as strong. First of all, the framing of each shot as well as its composition is very pleasing, and the set design does nothing but compliment that. Maureen Stapleton was an absolute joy to see on screen, and she was easily my favourite of the actors. She not only fitted her energetic character very well, but her interactions with the rest of her surroundings were handled magnificently too. I also very much enjoyed the use of colour and clothes in the movie. The fact that the troubled family lives in classy but depressing looking houses, while wearing bland and depressing colours, is no coincidence. The fact that the character of Pearl is colourful in not just her personality, is also no coincidence. Finally, the mother, Geraldine Page, is mesmerising at expressing her mental illness, while also being distant and restrained in her performance. Woody Allen is such a fine film-maker and I have yet to completely dive into his work. I so far like the stories he tells, and I'm ready to be told some more.

⭐⭐⭐



movies can be okay...
Actually, after thinking about it, the film does have some sort of self awareness of its pretension. There's a great dinner scene with all of the characters discussing a certain play they had seen, and they're expressing their sophisticated opinions in a typical bourgeois manner, then there is Pearl (Maureen Stapleton), thinking that they're reading too much into it, and stating a more down to earth and simplistic opinion of the play.

Not only that, but the whole movie is a battle in the family between its members, and one of the discussed problems they fight over is their upbringing, and elitist behaviour. With all of that being said, the film remains in its same spot, quality wise.



I won't dance. Don't ask me...
The Disaster Artist (2017) by James Franco

Overall, this is a very enjoyable movie, but I can already imagine myself disliking it more and more on repeated viewings.
I agree one hundred percent - I laughed laud in the cinema, but I don't need to watch it once again.



Speaking of The Shape of Water I think Sally Hawkins was more convining in Maudie. Have you seen it already?
To go with the other posts on this page: i think Samantha Morton gave a much better performance of a mute character in Woody Allens Sweet & Lowdown.



movies can be okay...
I just finished watching "Irreversible" and I feel like I got hit by a train. Easily, without a single doubt, the most intense experience I've ever had while watching a film.



movies can be okay...
Speaking of The Shape of Water I think Sally Hawkins was more convining in Maudie. Have you seen it already?
To go with the other posts on this page: i think Samantha Morton gave a much better performance of a mute character in Woody Allens Sweet & Lowdown.
I haven't seen neither films, but they're on my watchlist. Also, I didn't enjoy Sally Hawkins' performance because of how realistically she portrayed a mute. I enjoyed her so much because of her portrayal of a mute in a fairy-tail and exaggerated setting. She fit her character perfectly, in my opinion.