Thief's Monthly Movie Loot - 2022 Edition

Dogs are man's best friend, they say. But there's also a rather profound bond between a child and a dog. I had two dogs during my childhood and youth; one that we got when I was like 8, and another one we got when I was around 18, and I loved both very much. Dogs are unrelenting friends, and for a kid that's having a hard time blending in and making friends, that's something infinitely valuable.

My Dog Skip follows such a friendship between lonely outcast Willie Morris (Frankie Muniz) and Skip, the friendly Terrier that his mother gives him for his birthday. Willie's father (Kevin Bacon) is a well-intentioned, but stern veteran that lost his leg in the war, who seems unable to connect with his son or comfort him as he's bullied. So the bond with Skip comes to fill a certain void in the kid.

The film is based on a book written by the real Willie Morris, an author who wrote numerous books. In My Dog Skip, he recollects of the impact the dog had on his life, his family, and the town they lived in. Unfortunately, the film skims over many of the more interesting aspects, like the effect of war on certain characters, or the racial situations in the town. Granted, it is supposed to be told from the perspective of a child, but I still think they could've done a better job.

When it comes to the focus of the story, which is the relationship between Willie and the dog, the approach might be too sappy and melodramatic for some tastes, with several crucial and emotional moments lacking any subtlety, with swelling score and slow motion. In focusing on that relationship, it underserves what I thought were more interesting and important human relationships between Willie and his dad, his friends, his girlfriend, and the traumatized veteran that lives next door (Luke Wilson).

But again, the focus is the relationship between the kid and the dog, and I do think it succeeded in showcasing how important that bond is. I know, because it brought back fond memories of the times when I had a dog. The dog I had when I was 18 – Lady – stayed with us for 12 years. My then-girlfriend gave her to me when she was a newborn puppy, much to the chagrin of my mom, who had swore she didn't want another dog after losing our previous one (the one we had when I was 8).

But much like Skip, Lady earned her place, and my mom eventually came around. When I married at 29 and moved out of home, Lady stayed with my mom. Much like Skip, she started having some health issues, and died at 12 years old, while I was away. Even though I wasn't an only child, when I got her, I was the only one still at home, so we were kinda "only child, only dog" as well. With all its flaws, the film fondly reminded me of those times, so what more can I ask?

Grade:

__________________

Thunder Road follows Jim Arnaud (Jim Cummings), a police officer in a small town struggling with a number of issues; the potential divorce from his wife, the rejections from his young daughter, and the recent death of his mother, which is what the film starts with and sort of what frames the events of the film, to the point that he feels like he doesn't know what he's doing anymore.

This project started when Cummings released a 2016 short film of the same name, that features Arnaud offering an awkward eulogy at his mother's funeral. The short film, which lasts 13 minutes, is done with a continuous shot. As part of his eulogy, Arnaud tries to awkwardly dance and sing Bruce Springsteen's "Thunder Road", which was one of his mother's favorite songs. It is such an odd scene in how it balances comedy and drama, but somehow it works.

Cummings manages to sustain that same vibe in the feature film, opening with the same funeral scene (with some slight but key differences), but expanding it to see all the issues that are plaguing Jim's life. Despite being a decorated and seemingly respected officer, his life is crumbling around him, leaving him powerless and not sure of what to do. There are also hints at potential mental health issues that, even if not explored at all, are apparently there.

But that is where the film's strength is. As both writer, director, and actor, Cummings succeeds in transmitting those feelings of mental instability, anxiety, insecurity as a parent, frustration, bottled up anger, the uneasiness of things unraveling, the impotence against circumstances and not knowing what to do. Even if I'm not going through all the issues that Jim is, I can certainly identify with a lot of those feelings.

Again, there is skill in how Cummings walks that fine line between drama and comedy, and how he makes us feel for Jim. His direction is confident and purposeful, with a couple of long takes that are not necessarily done for technical flash, but rather to let the emotions of Jim build up. Aside of the opening funeral scene, there is a really good one where Jim has an emotional breakdown on a parking lot.

There are some things that seemed unnecessary, like some exchanges with a young teenager that Jim tries to help stay away from trouble, and other things that I think could've been explored a bit more, especially regarding his wife. But there's a good anchor with Jim's relationship with his young daughter (Kendal Farr) and his friendship with his partner (Nican Robinson). Jim Arnaud might not know what he's doing, but Jim Cummings certainly is.

Grade:

@Thief great review (great last line, in particular). I'm not sure if you've seen his other stuff (two other features, one released recently), but if not, you're basically guaranteed to like it. He's got a distinct vibe, obviously, and if it works for you it always works for you.

I've heard good things about Snow Hollow, but I didn't even know it was from him until last week when I saw this. I'm gonna bump that up in my queue.

Better late than never. I finally dropped Episode 58 of The Movie Loot, where I talk a bit about the Oscars aftermath, except the slap! and also some thoughts on all the films I saw during March.

The Movie Loot 58 - The Oscars Aftermath / March Loot

I try to put the spotlight back on some of the winners and milestones of Oscar night. After that, I go on with my quick thoughts on everything else I saw during the month. Hope you can check it out!

Remember that you can also listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and most podcasting platforms.

I was also invited again to join the Cinematic Council of Podcasts, led by Best Film Ever Podcast, along with Kevin (The Podcast that Wouldn't Die) and Stewart (Stew World Order).

The Cinematic Council of Podcasts - The Oscars, Will Smith & Summer Preview 2022

Here we also talk a bit about the Oscars (and yes, the slap was brought up here) as well as our thoughts and expectations on some upcoming films. Check it out!

Set in 1946, The Secret of Roan Inish follows Fiona (Jeni Courtney), a young girl who, after the death of her mother, is sent to live with her grandparents near the coast. It is there that she learns about the island of Roan Inish, where the family used to live before the war, as well as the mysterious disappearance of her little brother, Jamie.

This is a film I hadn't heard of before; my experience with John Sayles is limited to Eight Men Out. But I thought it was a pretty solid and charming family film. Most of the performances were good, but I gotta give it to Courtney, who I think did a pretty good job of carrying most of the film on her own.

Still, there are some things as far as the mythology goes that are brushed over or not addressed at all, and the way the plot unfolds feels a bit scattered or meandering. There's a simplicity to how the film operates that can be seen as a strength or a weakness. Sayles' direction is not flashy, but it gets the job done.

I saw the film about a week or two ago, and already there are things that have vanished from my mind. But there's such a gentleness and a charm to its innocence that kinda stays with you. If there's something to it is that I can see myself showing this to my kids when they get a little older.

Grade:

True Romance follows Clarence and Alabama Worley (Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette), a loner and a prostitute that get married after meeting one night. But when Clarence tries to settle things with Alabama's pimp, they find themselves on the run from both the Mafia and the cops.

This is a film I remember seeing and enjoying back in the 90s, but that for some reason, I hadn't revisited in around 20 years. It also features a huge cast that, even though most of them were not big stars yet, it still makes for an interesting and impressive ensemble. From Dennis Hopper, James Gandolfini and Christopher Walken to Brad Pitt, Gary Oldman, and Michael Rapaport, among many others.

The film is written by Quentin Tarantino and is directed by Tony Scott, and it features both their distinctive trademarks of tense yet cleverly written dialogue, as well as excessive hyper-violence and slow motion action scenes. I found myself enjoying the Tarantino-esque bits of it more than the uber-violent excesses of Scott. The scene between Clarence and Drexl (Oldman) is incredibly tense because of the dialogue, and so is the one between Walken and Hopper. It's a pity that Tarantino and Scott had to rely on racism, though. That "punchline" from Hopper is certainly an unfortunate one.

There does seem to be an overload of subplots that seem to be unnecessary or that don't necessarily pay off, like how Clarence and Alabama end up together, or his hallucinations with Elvis, but the parts that hit, hit extremely well. It also requires a good amount of suspension of disbelief not only to believe that a "nerd loner" like Clarence would have the guts to pull off everything he does, but to do it with the bravura that he does.

That mostly falls on the chemistry between Slater and Arquette, both of which make you believe that such different characters could pair up and end up working together so well. Much like Tarantino and Scott, they learn to work around their differences while balancing each other to work around their flaws, resulting in something "so cool".

Grade:

That's how Mary (Sophie Marceau) describes things as she struggles with her feelings for two different men. This is not like a movie, where everything is clear, expected, organized, with a clear purpose. Ironically, this is a case where the movie is indeed chaos, unexpected, pain, disorder... and yet, much like Mary, one can't help but be drawn to it.

Mad Love follows Mary's boyfriend, Micky (Tchéky Karyo), a bank robber that, along with his gang, stumble upon León (Francis Huster) and take him under his wing, only to have him fall in love with Mary starting a complicated love triangle. But if that's complicated, so is director's Andrzej Żuławski's approach to the film.

Chaos, unexpected, and disorder are definitely ways that can describe the film. There is a frenetic and chaotic energy to it that can certainly be off-putting. I remember thinking "Wow, this scene is crazy!" as I saw the opening heist, thinking it would be a one-scene thing, and then 20 minutes later realizing "Oh, so the whole film is like this". Much like León, who decides to jump in with the gang and follow them, you have to jump in and surrender to it.

It has been a couple of days since I watched it and, like Takoma said, I'm still not entirely sure that I understood *everything* that happened. Still, there's a mesmerizing quality to the film; a combination of that manic "disorder" and a dance-like harmony to the direction and the actors movements. The performances, especially Marceau, also help you hold your attention.

But being honest, despite some qualities I appreciated, it was a challenge and a bit of a chore to get through. It's the kind of film that I just couldn't vibe with, and I pushed through only to get it done for the Hall of Fame 27. However, I can see myself going back to it again sometime, with a different mindset, and see if everything is clear... expected, organized, with a clear purpose, or if what I get again is chaos, unexpected, pain, disorder.

Grade:

I've had a busy month as far as podcasting goes. Last week, I was a guest on two episodes of The Film Effect Podcast. On the first one, I join the host, Ed, along with his daughter Madilyn to talk Jordan Peele's Us, which you can check out here...

Us (2019) w/Carlo from The Movie Loot & Madilyn from Mad-Dad Movie Review

And then, I joined the whole Film Effect Podcast crew for one of their FEWERcast episodes, where they discuss recent news, upcoming films, and random recommendations. You can check that one here...

FEWERcast 10 (4-22-22) w/ Carlo from The Movie Loot Podcast

I also recorded two more guest appearances for two other shows, but they haven't dropped yet, but I'll share them as they come. Hope you check these out and enjoy them!

Set in a small island in Maine, Dolores Claiborne follows the titular woman (Kathy Bates) after she is accused of murdering her wealthy yet elderly employer, Vera. The inquiry by obsessive Detective John Mackey (Christopher Plummer) brings Dolores' estranged daughter, Selena (Jennifer Jason Leigh) reluctantly back into the island, which in turn stirs up memories about the death of Dolores' husband and Selena's father 18 years ago.

This is a film I saw some time during the late 1990s, maybe even more than once, and that somehow stuck with me. Not only because of the intrigue of how the story unfolds its mystery, but also because of the dynamics between the "no shit taken" Dolores and the bitter and resentful Selena. Both elements remain probably the most interesting aspects of the film, although rewatching it made me more aware of its flaws.

My first issue is more of a "story" issue (i.e. Stephen King) and not necessarily the film's, but I don't think the whole "Did Dolores murder her employer" angle was either necessary or well executed. I understand it is a way to put us a bit against her and keep us guessing a bit, but I thought there was enough with the mother/daughter conflict and the flashbacks about the father to hold the film, and the flashbacks about the father. Also, as much as I love Plummer, the character of Mackey is not that well written. The final inquiry where he lashes at Dolores only to have Selena swoop in to the rescue wasn't very well written or handled.

Thankfully, Bates is an excellent actress and she puts so much into this character that you can, at the most, feel for her or at the very least, understand where she's coming from as a woman trapped by the circumstances. By contrasting who she was with who she is, we can understand the "real hell" that has come over her slowly. Jason Leigh does her best with an underwritten character, but despite that, her moments with Bates are pretty good, thanks to both actresses. I just wish we could've gotten more inside Selena's mind and her feelings since she's the most vulnerable character after all.

But the focus of the story is Dolores, a tragic character that slowly gets thrown into a figurative hell; from an abusive relationship to the subsequent harassments, suspicions, and humiliations from townspeople, she has seen hell coming at her slowly through the years, and has embraced her role as a "b-itch", perhaps to shield herself. The film is a solid example of two women choosing to finally face that hell, not to automatically fix their lives, but to start to walk away from it together.

Grade:

What if a family of creepy doppelgängers broke into your house and stood right in front of you? What would you ask? The above is part of the exchange between the members of the Wilson family as they face their creepy doppelgängers. Red's reply might seem odd and out of nowhere, and it might get a chuckle out of you, but it goes right to the core of one of the main themes of this film.

Us follows the Wilsons as they head to Santa Cruz to enjoy a nice summer weekend. The trip seems to bring up a traumatizing experience that Adelaide (Lupita Nyong'o) had at the same beach when she was a child, where she encountered her doppelgänger. Despite this, they decide to have fun, until they find themselves face to face with their "evil" counterparts.

This is director Jordan Peele's second film, after the wildly successful and critically acclaimed Get Out. If there's one thing evident from both films is that Peele, for better or worse, certainly has a lot to say about a lot of issues in the country. Whereas Get Out seemed to focus mostly on racial issues, Us seems to tackle so much more: from race and class to consumerism and free will, among other things.

The film opens with a text that states that there are "thousands of miles" of abandoned tunnels beneath the US. But pretty soon we realize that it is not only the tunnels that were abandoned, which brings forth the metaphor of a whole strata of people that have been forgotten by the government, society, or whatever. Maybe because of their race, or their income, religion, or any other characteristic.

If it seems like a stretch, maybe a second viewing might help, because I think that this theme, as well as the overall superficiality of American society, and the attempts of each group to pretend their someone or something else to rise above their "level", is all over the film. To make it work, Peele uses a smartly written script that cleverly balances comedy and horror, a deliberate and meticulous direction where everything seems to have a purpose, and excellent performances from pretty much all his cast, most of which have to inhabit two characters.

But special credit goes to Nyong'o, who fills both her characters with such unique intricacies. From Adelaide's seemingly affable and good-natured persona that's hiding this dread and fear that you can feel inside her, to Red's confidence and determination, despite being abandoned and discarded, to crawl back up to make her statement. The line delivery, the way Nyong'o uses her voice and physicality for each is just amazing.

One can say that the metaphor and social commentary of the story ends up being more important than the logistics of how the reality that the film is presenting would work or make sense in the real world. But that's the statement that Peele wants to make, and I love how it works on so many levels. It's funny and terrifying, intriguing and thrilling, but also deep and thought-provoking.

Grade:

There is indeed an interesting contrast between the finesse and technique of a bullfighter, and the relentless and angry bull that charges at him with nothing more than instinct. The bullfighter dances, the bull lunges. More often than not, the bullfighter succeeds in avoiding the attacks of the bull. But sometimes... the technique, the finesse, the reason fails, and the instinct that we tried so hard to dance around and toy with succeeds in destroying us. That is a snapshot of what happens to most of the characters in this Spanish film

Magical Girl follows three separate characters, each with different instincts, emotions, and struggles. There is Luis (Luis Bermejo), the unemployed teacher that is determined to buy an expensive anime dress for her terminally ill daughter. Then there is Bárbara (Bárbara Lennie), the mysterious and enigmatic woman that seems to be recovering from something while trapped in a problematic marriage. Finally, we have Damián (José Sacristán), a former teacher that seems to be suffering the consequences of letting his instincts take over.

The film presents the three storylines separately, but eventually converges them in a tragic collision course where reason fails and instincts succeed. Directed and written by Carlos Vermut, he uses a cold and distant approach to the camera, but does so with undeniable skill. There is a careful selection of what to show, when to show it, and how to show it, which heightens the tension and builds the atmosphere of dread that surrounds every character, where you're sure no one will probably succeed.

Much like the bullfighter, Vermut uses his technique to dance around certain moments on the film while toying with certain revelations. The restraint he shows to avoid the desire to explain too much or show too much is impressive. This is the first film of his I've seen, but I'm sure I will try to check out more of his work.

Grade:

Those logistics. The first time I watched Us I was blasted right out of the story the first time all the revelations come at the end, thinking "How on Earth is that even possible?" It's clearly not possible - but why be restricted by what's possible when a film can exist as an artform that explores social issues? I agree with you, but at the same time it still bothers me for some reason. That leap into absurdity it takes. It's a measure of how good this film is that I still rate it highly, despite that one issue it has for me.

__________________

Something I argued on the podcast episode that I linked above is how many films, horror films and others, take the same approach. Consider Halloween and how it presents us with a man that is able to take multiple hits, stabs in the face, and finally six gunshots, and still stand up again. Why? Because he's supposed to symbolize an unstoppable presence, this evil that just won't go away. Even if it's not possible that a man would sustain that damage, the metaphor of the story takes over. So I'm more than willing to suspend my disbelief about underground dwellers coming to the surface to make a human chain if it does so in a way that's well crafted, entertaining, and thought-provoking.

The above text appears as the lead in the very final scene, but it is an accurate description of not only what will happen in the last 15 minutes, but what has preceded it too. Set in the Edo period, Demons follows Gengobe (Katsuo Nakamura), a disgraced samurai that's determined to take revenge against the geisha that betrayed him (Yasuko Sanjo) and her husband (Juro Kara).

This is a film I knew nothing about, so I was very much surprised by how much horror it was; the aforementioned "sea of blood". The thing is that Gengobe is haunted by visions or hallucinations, "demons" perhaps, that show him things that will be and things that can be. Most of this images are horrific and fuel his paranoia, while at the same time driving him to take the same horrific actions he's hallucinating of.

I very much appreciated the direction and cinematography on this. Not only was the camera movement very neat and effective, but the blocking of the scenes, the use of light and shadows, and "dead spaces" in the framing of certain shots was impressive. Even though Matsumoto keeps his camera at a distance many times, he's not afraid to zoom into the violence to show us that "sea of blood".

Most of the performances are solid, but I particularly enjoyed the performances of Nakamura and Sanjo. The first one plays Gengobe with mixtures of desperation, unhinged anger, as well as frustration, while Sanjo perfectly plays the deceiving nature and greed of Koman, followed by her fear of being caught up with. Because she knows that if Gengobe finds them, it will be a sea of blood.

Grade:

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away... we met this young man who hadn't really seen the world beyond his home planet of Tatooine. Star Wars follows the adventures of this young man, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), as destiny finds its way into this faraway planet to set him on the heroic path that was expected of him. After tragedy hits, Luke joins a mysterious hermit, a rouge pilot and his Wookie sidekick to rescue Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher).

Released in 1977, the film was a groundbreaking spectacle of fantasy, visuals, and special effects. The attention to detail in the design of ships, locations, creatures, and everything else is astonishing. But beyond all the production design and visuals, Luke is always at the center of the story, as he tries to find his way into this new and vast world. Hamill might not be the best actor, but he does carry a certain boyish charm, and his chemistry with Fisher and Harrison Ford is undeniable.

Obviously, this wasn't my first watch, but as I was preparing for an upcoming podcast episode, I decided to give it a go, along with my kids. And even though they drifted off a bit in the second act, they really dug the last act as our heroes try to take down the Death Star. As someone who grew up watching this since I was a kid (the film was released literally the same year I was born), it was certainly a moving experience to try to pass that down to them.

In one of the most iconic shots of the film, Luke stands outside his desert home, looking at the sunset ("suns-set"?), dreaming of a world he doesn't know yet. A world that, much like his gateway to it, he will soon realize is full of "scum and villainy", but also of dreamlike aspirations, endless opportunities, and of course, good friends. Regardless of what we think about the franchise, we can't deny that Star Wars opened our eyes to this new "galaxy" of film possibilities.

Grade:

Several years ago, CNN released a list of the "7 freakiest places on the planet". Among the list was Gonjiam Psychiatric Hospital, in South Korea. The building was closed during the 1990s because of economic issues and sewage problems, but that didn't stop people from creating stories of mysterious mass deaths and crazy doctors, and certainly didn't stop curious tourists from pouring into the place.

Gonjiam: Haunted Asylum feeds off of that curiosity. The film follows the crew of a YouTube channel called "Horror Times" that decides to explore the building and transmit it live. The focus of their exploration seems to be the enigmatic Room 402, which has remained closed since the hospital was shut down. The film starts with two teenage boys trying to break the door open, only to disappear, which sparks the Horror Times crew to investigate.

On all my years on the Internet, I've seen several different viral videos that are frequently shared via social media of certain security cameras where everything goes calm for a while only to have a horrifying image suddenly jump in front of the camera to scare you. A fair share of them have made me jump, others not so much. Is it gimmicky? Yes, but I guess they achieve what they set out to do.

In some ways, Gonjiam: Haunted Asylum could be seen as a more "elaborate" version of that because the peaks of the film come from a few moments that are framed that way (things going quiet for a while, then quick cut to a scary image). Just like those viral videos I mentioned above, this is kinda effective, I guess... but it's still gimmicky and after the initial jumpscare, not that memorable.

Even though that might sound like a negative, the production values are solid and the film does manage to build up a decent atmosphere of dread. Also, the cast is not that bad, but they're all just interchangeable and with no discerning characteristics to set them apart, which makes it harder for us to connect with what's going on. So if you're going down this road, just keep your expectations to something simple and maybe invite some friends over to your place... the place where ghosts live, on the screen at least.

Grade:

Mediocre, defenseless, no poise. That is an incredibly harsh way to describe someone and the person on the receiving end would probably have a hard time recovering from the brunt of the insult, especially if the one dishing it out is her own father. That is the basis for this William Wyler's underseen drama.

The Heiress follows Catherine (Olivia de Havilland), a naïve and shy young woman with poor social skills. This results in the disappointment of her father, Dr. Austin Sloper (Ralph Richardson), a widower that can't help but compare her to his late wife; "Only I know what I lost when she died, and what I got in her place." Ouch. So when a young and handsome man, Morris (Montgomery Clift) starts courting Catherine, Dr. Sloper is obviously suspicious and assumes he's after her money.

This is a film I hadn't heard much about, until two guests of my podcast brought it up a couple of months ago, specifically praising De Havilland's performance, and oh, how right they were. She is excellent in the role as she perfectly portrays the evolution of Catherine in a way that's both believable and organic. Clift and Richardson are not far behind; especially Richardson, who is also great handling the contempt under that façade of fake admiration.

Aside from the performances, Wyler's direction is also great. I loved the way he used the camera to shift focus between characters, specifically his choices of who is in front of the camera and who is giving his/her back to it on certain climatic conversations. I also really liked the way he used mirrors and reflections along the house.

I'm really surprised that this film and this performance doesn't get mentioned more often. It's interesting that the film follows Catherine, a character who goes along mostly unnoticed only to reveal a strong and confident persona in the end. The Heiress might go along unnoticed, but it is truly a showcase of great direction, pitch-perfect writing, and flawless performances.

Grade:

If asked to rank her favorite movies, my mom would probably consider this Top 5 easy, so although I haven't seen it in many years it's one I've seen a bunch and I agree. An Oscar-winning performance from ODH and a recent Criterion release should have put this on the radar of more film buffs. She's incredible here.

__________________
Captain's Log
My Collection