Movie Tab II

Tools    





Seen in May Pt.3/3



A real fun watch. I loved watching the dynamic between Bogart and Hepburn as they slowly become more friendly with each other and crack more jokes. I really feel like going off on a s*itty boat down to Africa with my friends after seeing this.


BTW the fact that a fan made a 'Buried' style poster for Deadpool just because they both star Ryan Reynolds just makes my night.

Pure, unfiltered popcorn fun. I'm just an absolute sucker for all those self-referential/fourth wall etc. jokes. The plot was definitely better than the first one. The action is pretty fun and I really liked all the characters.


- [RE-WATCH]
Watched it again as I felt the need for some adrenaline. Still scares the absolute badonkles out of me (My heart actually started to feel strange after one of the scares, that's probably not good). A complete opposite to my other found-footage darling The Blair Witch Project, most of the film uses shock and jumpscares to keep the audience in a state of terror. That might sound really s*it, but they're more like 'Oh Jesus I can't breathe plz send a doctor!!!' jumpscares than ones that mildly startle you and make you groan with annoyance. I'd suggest you watch this as a standalone film, as the sequel feels very unnecessary and messes with the first one's brilliant ending.



May, 2018 movies watched-

The Post (2017)
+ I expect more from Spielberg, Streep, and Hanks.

The Age of Shadows (2016)
- There ends up being some good action and violence, but it was a pretty good wait to get there.

Le Jour se Leve (1939)
From the noirs list, and I'd definitely recommend it for the 30's countdown.

Destry Rides Again (1939)
Very enjoyable western with Jimmy Stewart and Marlene Dietrich.

Fury (1936)
+ Fritz Lang directs Spencer Tracy. A couple of things I didn't care for but it's a pretty good flick.

She Done Him Wrong (1933)
- From the laughs list, watch it if you love Mae West.

Out of the Blue (1980) Repeat viewing
A movie that haunts me with one of my favorite endings.

Horse Feathers (1932)
It's a comedy, and I laughed a lot.

The Lady Vanishes (1938) Repeat viewing
Like the story and performances, the humor not so much.

Morocco (1930)
Ok thanks to Marlene Dietrich.

I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932)
- A 30's movie that definitely suits my taste.

I'm Not There (2007)
Plenty of positives even if it were a bit of a struggle for me.

The Scarlet Empress (1934)
+ Marlene Dietrich is a goddess who helps turn this historical epic into part sex comedy.

Sons of the Desert (1933)
An amusing 65 minutes with Laurel and Hardy.

Female Vampire (1973)
A hot vampire but otherwise pretty insignificant.

Frances Ha (2012)
I liked it more than I expected to considering I don't like slackers.

Three Monkeys (2008)
+ Intense Turkish movie with great performances.

Scarface (1932)
+ Pretty entertaining.

Thelma (2017)
- One of the best horrors I've seen from the last couple of years.

Topper (1937)
From the laughs list, I would call it an average good movie from the 30's.

Den of Thieves (2018)
Nothing great but still a relief to see a movie with some machismo these days.

The Leopard (1963) Repeat viewing
Long, slow, and the dubbing bothered me. It's still magnificent filmmaking.

The Thin Man (1934)
Funny and entertaining murder mystery.

Giallo A Venezia (1979)
- Not good, but quite nasty and sleazy.

3:10 to Yuma (2007)
- An entertaining western that I found superior to the original.

Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
Well made but too fantastical for my taste.

Total May viewings-26
Total 2018 viewings-132



The Hateful Eight



A bounty hunter in charge of escorting a criminal to hang is stuck in a motel in the middle of a deadly blizzard. He must wait out the blizzard and everything in the motel is not what it seems.

Quentin Tarantino is a director whose films are equivalent to drugs like cocaine or heroine. Yes, both in terms of the addictive nature and the harm they do to the recipient. But they are excellent pieces of work.Why do you think movies like Stronger or Hostiles or Southpaw or black-mass or out of the furnace or concussion and many other feel good/"important" movies are shut out of the Oscars ? whats the difference between a movie about journalists on lifetime channel and spotlight ? well the number 1 rule about Oscar movies for the most part is nuance and entertainment value of the movies. Movies should never feel like history lessons or preachy. So Tarantino movies check most of the boxes an academy voter would look for in a movie. Entertainment value , Well developed characters, Character driven story line, risky subject matters, casting actors for their talent rather than their star power (for the most part) or identifying obscure actors and pushing them in to stardom or reinvigorating actor's careers.All these are things that the academy loves so much .They love original content that is not based on an IP.But at the same time the movie should not be apologetic for its vision. Something like wolf of wall street was never apologetic for showing the debauchery of the characters. Even at the end they show how white collar criminals are treated in prison and society is always willing to hire them to learn from white collar criminals. Nice little bows at the end of the movie are not welcome. Audience need to feel the punch of the movie. Even Tarantino movies are highly stylized , so his nice little bows are also stylized and has a certain amount of parody to them.

There is room for social commentary to be had when discussing the fans of his movies. After leaving Weinstein company Quentin Tarantino was "wooed" by various studio heads to buy the distribution rights for his movie.So what does that say about his status. Facts tell us that his movies gross between 100 to 500 million dollar. They have huge fan following. You have a 15 yr old girl from France is as excited for his movie as a 20 yr guy from Russia and a 17 yr old guy from India and 18 yr old from Germany. His movies are most likely not going to win best pictures.So whats the appeal ? well the combination of 100-500 million dollar box office + 8-10 Oscar nominations with couple of wins + huge fan following that are passionate and will talk about the movie for years to come is a rare thing to guarantee. With out even shooting a single frame of a movie you can guarantee that any Tarantino movie will have most of these checkboxes covered. Often times you either get a forgettable billion dollar hit or obscure Oscar nominees but rarely do you get movies with such anticipation and meet the anticipation because you want that drug and your body is willing to morph even less potent drug into something you like. You don't have to feed a starving person a world class steak to make him happy. You can just give him an under cooked steak and as long as its steak he will be happy.

So the key word here is "bro-code". Thats a terms which means a lot of things to lot of people.For a loner, its this obscure thing which he lacks and he either learns to vilify that concept or feel incredibly insecure about themselves because they lack it. For a person with an active life and a healthy relationship with fellow humans its this cut throat code which starts with "we against them" - gender wise and every man for himself when stuff hits the fan but till then we back each other up. Why am I saying this ? well, this mainly applies to guys hitting their puberty. This "bro-code" is magnified at their age.Everywhere they see, they see girls vying for the popular guy or guys out macho-ing each other in-front of girls. over course of time by early to mid 20s it will all cool down. But that 10 years "bro-code" is a major part. They start looking for a mating partner but at the same time they realize the need to be tough and be a man. Obviously every person watches movies. So the internal and social changes at this age group will effect the viewing habits. And Tarantino/ Nolan/Dicaprio movies fall into that category. They are not kid movies like Marvel /Disney and they are not adult fair like kings speech. They are attracted to movies which are full of contradictions. Smart movie yet full of expositions and explaining. Realistic but hyper realistic with need for suspension of disbelief. Male ambiguity and brood and anti heroes. Moral dilemma and yet they do the right thing. They are innovative but only as long as they have male lead. Movies like Annihilation has every right to be in the same conversation as Inception. But for some reason since it doesn't have the bells and whistles it doesn't get the same attention.The crazy part of it all is that this group are some of the most regular movie goers ever. If you can tap into the psyche of these guys at this age..you have essential got them for another 2 decades. As long as you don't disappoint them and give them a reason to come to theaters as opposed to watching it at home, you have their money. 15-20 age group of people are desperately looking for an idol . Most of the times they want an Idol that is so far up their reach and so successful. And Nolan/Tarantino/Dicaprio is their answer. They don't want realistic idols who failed a couple of times and eventually succeeded by learning from their failures.They want consistent masterpieces from the get go. And the sad part of it all is that most of these fanboys end up having failures and eventual success or very minimal success in life. The ones who actual go on to achieve the same heights as their idols are not obsessed with their idols. Their idols are their case studies and not their god.So a guy who watched DiCaprio movie in theater for 40 yrs straight in the movies has a higher probability of being an average Joe than a exceptional genius. May be they need much more practical Idols ?

I will let you ruminate on that thought. But getting back to this movie , its a great movie with "who done it" style of plot. But the punches don't land. The mystery of it doesn't work. One of the segment in quite unnecessary except to show how professional criminals stage a criminal act.We have seen that in tons of thriller/crime films.It almost felt like Tarantino is much more impressed with his own dialogue than audience. I think the phrase is "full of himself". Performances are decent but the leads Kurt Russell , Jennifer Jason Leigh and Walton goggins are good. Samuel l Jackson is the same guy he is in every movie but with very good dialogue. I think I started realizing Tarantino is so full of himself during Django Unchained when there is this dialogue " I am curious what makes you so curious". That to me is very basic dialogue that I have heard a million times but for some reason Tarantino couldn't pick it up. This movie has few such lines. There are lot of bad guys and boy do they do socially reprehensible stuff and the kind of stuff that movie buffs from France , Germany , Russia , Italy and India fall head over heals for because of a combination of American dream and English not being their first language, that makes them feel the dialogues are much more resonant and awesome than they are.BTW I do think he was rightfully not nominated for Oscar for screenwriting.Give it a go and the best time is in December snow.



I was especially surprised by how good Ron Silver is as his conflicted attorney.
@IroquoisDo you mean in this role in particular? For me, Ron Silver is one of those actors who always makes me feel better about a film just because he's there. Much like Brian Dennehy.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



Welcome to the human race...
A bit, yeah. I've liked him in the other films I've seen him in, but this stands out because he's more than holding his own against Jeremy Irons as opposed to outshining actors like JCVD or Charlie Sheen.



Batman Begins



The movie deals with the origins of Batman in a way that is unique to the character and has much more depth than any other superhero movie.

I am a Nolan fanboy. But I do know that he is overrated. On a scale of 1 to 10 if his skill set is a 7, his fan following makes it out to be 11. But in all honesty this is my favorite superhero movie of all time. The first half of the movie is some of the best cinema of all time. It juggles lot of concepts and themes. Loss, pain,survivors guilt,rage,aimlessness and whole lot of themes. All while making it epic in scope. In my opinion, this is one of the earliest movies in 21st century which made an epic that appeals to repeat moviegoers and also its scope has more to do with exotic locations. Something like gladiator is epic. But the kind of people who are more inclined to like those type of movies are sword and scandal fans. Those movies clearly do not hit all the demographics of movie audience. Some people will watch because it is epic in scale, some will watch because of Oscars, some will watch because they liked the trailer. You can't get someone who liked Gladiator to watch every movie Russell Crowe is in. The overlap of fans of sword and scandals and fans of Russell Crowe is not much. But with something like Batman Begins, Nolan made it his own. There is also this period piece disconnect with movies like Gladiator. But something like Batman Begins deals with male emotions on this grand realistic settings. Snowy mountains or Dark city structures.Its much more from the mind of Christopher Nolan and his sensibilities than Gladiator is from the mind of Ridley Scott. Epic battle scenes can be seen in Lord of the rings as well. Its not something from the mind of Ridley Scott. But a man loosing his direction and ending up in prison as way to fight criminals and be closer to criminals is a stroke of genius. How crazy should a person be to go into jail for the purpose of beating up actual criminals. Its representation of the bad-ass phrase - "I am not locked in here with you..you are locked in here with me". Add to that the fact that Bruce Wayne is doing these things. You have a potent mix for masculine orgasm on screen. That is much more masculine than any army commander leading his men into battle. Because there is some anti-heroic sinister quality to becoming a criminal to fight crime. All these make for a potent drug of a movie that you want more of. I don't care if its a war movie , if its dipped in this drug I want it.

The first half of the movie outweighs the flaws in second half of the movie. Once he starts becoming batman, you fall into genre tropes of super villain and stuff. But even in that , there are moments of genius where in the villain was his mentor and inclusion of references to misplaced sense of anger and all those masculine concepts is masterfully done.

Nolan's movies are all thrillers. There is something anti-establishment waiting to happen. Even a space movie like interstellar has moments of cowardice and disobeying rules in situations of life and death. I think this is one sub-genre Nolan shares with Tarantino, thriller.
That aspect of their movies are highly commercial. Thrillers are commercial genres. You are waiting to see something that you don't see in everyday life.Because we are all wild animals that are controlled by social boundaries. Any chance we get to be wild without harming our existence, we go for it. They say that the chemical reactions in body doesn't know if it is real or you are watching a movie. I think that is his biggest flaw I can find. His foundations are genre based. However artistic the house is , its still rooted in genre. Thats a handicap.

So I would recommend this movie over any other superhero movie out there. Purely for the first half of it. The speech by Liam Neeson in prison is one of the best motivational speeches given by a stranger and the soundtrack Lasiurus from its score is awesome as it enhances the scenes.



THE LAST MOVIE STAR (2018)
dir Adam Rifkin



Not a very good movie but Reynolds is great. It puts way too much confidence in the co-stars who are all just basically out of their league with no real engaging business of their own. Seems very half baked, which is unfortunate.

THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE 2 (1986)
dir: Tobe Hooper



Has lunacy and comedy and atmosphere, but is just nasty and gross and I could not stomach it. Not anymore.

DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS (1988)
dir: Frank Oz



Not nearly as good as I had hoped. I'd seen this several times since its release. Kind of bland and dated. Nothing too exciting. Very predictable. Good cast, but didn't hold up well for my taste.

MARRIED TO THE MOB (1988)
dir: Jonathan Demme



I have to compare this to "Something Wild". It doesn't have the tonal shift of that film (this stays comedy), but it has adventurous tidbits that are fun to watch. Very well made and entertaining. I dug it quite a bit. Demme has done better work but this is still worth watching.

THE HOUSE ON SORORITY ROW (1983)
dir: Mark Rosman



Surprisingly competent slasher film. Shot really nicely, with great lighting and tight editing. This film knows what it's doing, but still kind of falls flat due to a routine scenario ala' Black Christmas and every other one out there. Well made and nicely acted but nothing too special unless you are a complete slasher junkie, in which case this is a special film. It is.

ELECTION (1999)
dir: Alexander Pyne



Skillfully written and very funny. I really, really enjoy this film every time I watch it. Never lets me down. Nothing bad to say about it. Solid.

BACK TO SCHOOL (1986)
dir: Alan Metter



I love this movie even though I have seen it dozens of times since 1986. If you like Rodney, this is the film to see. Also, Arnold Cunningham is in it, and he's out of control!



Crooked House (Gilles Paquet-Brenner, 2017)


Watched this Agatha Christie adaptation with my mum and it was a mess. I have found that I have become increasingly aware and critical of poor directing, especially over the last year, and struggle to get any time of enjoyment out of previously "mediocre" films as I once did. This is the perfect example of why. The direction is just awful, it's all over the place, there is no attention to the camera, no thought in any shots, just weird zooms. The acting was not convincing either, even biggish names like Gillian Anderson and Christina Hendricks are laughable in bizarre roles.

Anatomy of a Murder (Otto Preminger, 1959)


Frustrated at how poor Crooked House was, I decided it was time to pick a "classic" film that I had not yet seen. I definitely made the right choice, this is what cinema is all about. A slow burning atmospheric plot is brought to life by the direction. Here facts, plot and dialogue are simply minor elements that are elevated by a master behind the camera, capturing everything perfectly. This is a masterclass in how film directors should use their camera and skills to tell stories. Every scene is a joy to behold.
__________________



½
Mrs Harris (2005) - Nagy
Despite a cast bursting with talent; the director got hopelessly tangled up in the telling of his story. The lack of budget was really evident in certain scenes. The film includes two different reconstructions of the crime (a woman murders her jerk husband) but incredibly blows the film by beginning with the wrong one.

★★

La Petite Lili (2003) - Miller
An aspiring actress crashes the summer retreat of a cinema family; she jumps from starring in the black and white experimental film of the painfully idealistic son of a famous actress, to the mainstream films of her successful husband-director. The film then re-tells that same summer years later with another effort by the son; this time he has gone embarrassingly mainstream. All the actors get a moment to completely reveal their characters---save for the ingénue who never once shows her cold bloodedness to sacrifice everyone and everything to her movie career.

We Live Again (1934) - Mamoulian
A bit didactic and the character arc is unbelievable where a debauched Russian prince gives all his possessions and wealth away for socialist ideals, which include following a former summer fling’s conviction to a forced labour camp in the Siberian gulag.

Love, Simon (2018) - Berlanti
This is an epistolary film; all the character growth and the plot points are signalled with e-mails. The mother, despite being a professional therapist or a psychologist is unable to read the clues her son bats for the opposing team. The filmmakers err completely by constantly stressing how unimportant and mundane their story really is. This is just a boring teen romance you’ve seen a thousand times before, no reason to get excited, move along people. I flashed on the ten best high school teachers characters in film after some of the heavy mugging in the film---none of them can even approach Ms. Perky from 10 things I hate about you.

Bad Samaritan (2018) - Devlin
This includes the stock cliché of a Mensa level serial killer (aided by scary state of the art technology) who has been on a decades-long killing spree but never wonders for a second why he is such a nut-bar. The film depends on the audience swallowing a major hunk of cheese (along with several smaller bites) when a small time hood finds a woman tortured and chained inside a locked room while robbing the house, but he can’t be bothered to get involved---not once, but twice.

★★½

Grand Hotel (1932) - Goulding
A bit dated but some nice acting bits still resonate. This was the first use of the galaxy of stars as a marketing device for a film. What caught my eye here was a certain fetching, doe-eyed beauty playing the stenographer; who turned out to be the same hardened old bitty from What Ever Happened to Baby Jane. Wow, what a vamp! She was dazzling as a young actress.

… And the pursuit of happiness (1986) - Malle
A documentary about immigrants in America; not an exhaustive effort but a nice array of people making a new start in America; some poor people are fleeing injustice while other rich dudes are avoiding justice. He interviews people who made it big; astronauts; writers, and just normal people whose only dream is to make a better life. As always---whatever their political stripe, the director lets his subjects speak their minds.

Purgatorio: a journey into the heart of the border (2013) - Reyes
This is a documentary about the area around the US /Mexican border with various snapshots of Mexican social reality. Little vignettes like the old American doffer on the other side of the border who goes out on the week-ends to cleans up the trails, thinking every empty water bottle or candy wrapper is a trail maker directly orientating a marching mariachi band to his doorstep. Anything he can do to make sure these people die from exposure at mile 999 of a thousand mile journey is all fair and well. There is a painfully obvious observation that a poor country doesn’t have the financial resources to compete with the quality of life of a rich nation. The film could have been stronger had there been a deeper thematic connections between the slice of life scenes the director selected.

The Cow and I (1959) - Verneuil
A POW’s escape from Nazi Germany is simple; he’ll simply walk to France with a cow in hand, telling the Germans he meets that he is just bringing her to the farm down the road. There is a lot gentile humour here, like when he says goodbye to the farmer next door. He spends all day walking only to unexpectedly cross paths with him again at the end of the day, who good naturedly loads up him and his cow in his U-haul and drives him all the way back to where he started out in the morning.

Tully (2019) - Reitman
This is three different versions of the same woman. The first section is about the trials and tribulations of a woman in her third trimester who maintains the family household with two young children (one with special needs) while hubby comes home after a long day at work then plays video games all night. Is she dog-tired and a little frazzled? Cue the Frances McDormand voice: You betcha! The second part is a celebration of female friendship. The film is a little neat and tidy; she is always placed alongside pencil thin younger women to exaggerate the monstrosity she has become. Charlize Theron gained 50 pounds to play this character---this is method acting at its absolute worst, you can bet your mortgage payment she skipped over any dedicated research and preparation for the third story.

Murmur of the Heart (1971) - Malle
All the adults here are hypocrites or deeply flawed in this coming-of-age story; like the priest who takes a keen interest in our hero’s intellectual development, all the while groping his thighs during confession, His mother (who could be an older sister) is openly having an affair. The middle aged father is distant. In the background France is getting it’s ass handed to them at Dien Bien Phu and is about to pull out of Vietnam.

At first this seems like total anarchy, his two older brothers are like the spawns of hell about to be loosed onto an unsuspecting world. However this brief rebellion against their great privilege will soon evaporate once they realize they are going to inherit all that lucre. In a couple of years, they will be two bespectacled, balding men who spend their days sitting quietly behind desks as the financial advisers to the family fortune.

★★★

Vive le tour (1962) - Malle
A very energetic short documentary of the Tour de France bicycle race; beginning on the sidelines with the spectators of each village and town turning out to watch the pageantry. The camera then gets mobile and joins the race up close and personal, focusing on several facets; keeping the energy up; crack-ups; doping. I liked the mountain portion with the close-ups on their faces, the sweat literally pouring down their faces inrivulets intercut with little flashes of themselves imagining standing victorious on the podium.

Mistress America (2015) - Baumbach
Tracy makes a friend. A freshman college student calls up the older woman living downtown who is about to become her sister-in-law. This is filled with snappy dialogue and crackling one-liners. So much so, at times they appear to be one of those cell phone couples walking down the street elbow to elbow in animated conversation then at a stop light, they turn and reveal they both have ear phones and are not even aware of each other’s existence. Mistress America has a great introduction, descending the stairs like a bad-ass diva but she is clearly anxious about stumbling and doing a face plant in public. The timeline (a couple of weeks) is too short and the director fails to commit to whatever story he was telling, it’s kind of a cheat he doesn’t supply the tragic beats contained within this tale.

Game Night (2018) - Daley & Goldstein
Comedy is all about setting up the premise and exploiting it mercilessly. I thought this was really well constructed, you can see the gags being set-up; the incoming punch-lines; then a twist to the original joke; then the double twist; like the next door neighbour, they are not going to sneak a single thing by his vigilance and the humour becomes the futility of even trying. Or the player who always loses game night because he brings a bimbo with him---so he finally breaks down and brings in a ringer and he becomes the bimbo. Visual gags, like the monopoly game pieces are actual items in the film; or throwaways like the woman walking her dog at night and she glances down an alleyway then quickly hurries on.

The Rider (2017) - Zhao
Brady Blackburn is an up and coming rodeo star and kind of a horse whisperer, although he is the only one who doesn’t seem to know his rodeo career is over when a bucking bronc puts a metal plate in his head. But cowboys never quit; they saddle up and ride through the pain; he has to accept the bitter truth and let go of all his dreams. He has a permanent side effect from the head injury where his left hand suddenly clamps up uncontrollably and he has to pry open his fist, finger to finger to let go … metaphorically. There is a strong documentary vibe to this; the family in the film is a family in real life. His best friend in the film who suffered the catastrophic rodeo injury is confined to a wheelchair in real life.

The Lovers (1958) - Malle
There is a really great bait and switch here, setting up a confrontation then simply side-stepping the whole affair with something much more intriguing; which was done with a hitchhike, a haunting midnight stroll and a “boat ride”. I loved how the stranger was just idly commenting on her life, and when they pull into the driveway, it is the exact tableau of what he sketched out earlier is there in all its glory, but rather than weeping, she bursts out in uncontrollable laughter.

If you were young: rage (1970) - Fukasaku
When their factory closes, five guys decide, instead of getting picked off one by one, they should pool their meager resources and fight collectively for a decent future. Their plan is to buy one dump truck and over time, add another one and over time create an entire fleet. There is an exuberant mise en scene with freeze frames, skewed angles, and micro flash backs supplying the back stories. Needless to say, the system conspires against them, knocking them down and out one by one, until only two remain standing.

Place de la République (1974) - Malle
A very simple premise---for about 10 days around a Parisian park, Louis Malle simply accosts people in the street to see they will talk to him. Since the people inside the stores never come out, the street vendors, the older people who populate the benches and the unemployed become the natural cast of the film. The lady who sells lottery tickets from the open air kiosk says people share their most intimate thoughts and feelings because they are bored and unhappy, and we get a few examples of this, when people just pore out their life stories with a simple greeting. On one hand, this is brutally mundane; on the other hand, some people do have dramatic stories.

God’s Country (1985) - Malle
This documentary is major step up from Place de la République, where each passerby only had a moment to continue walking on or reveal themselves---invited into the comfort of their own homes in this farming community; the subjects of his film completely spill the beans about their lives in Glencoe, Minnesota. There is a kind of epilogue to this small town portrait when Malle returns five years later reconnecting with a few of the people during a strong economic downturn and the bitterness of the once optimistic farmers is shocking. No one wants their children to grow up to be farmers.

Human, too human (1974) - Malle
The film consists of short vignettes of assembly line work in an automobile plant. Everyone is aware of the film crew; and the workers fall into three neat categories: the main group are workers who can look at the camera while working, or if the pace is too swift, steal a glance while fixing a twist of wires, punching a precise hole or securing bolts. Another group of workers are those stuck in mind numbingly repetitive abstractions, pushing something into the maw of the machine or simply turning over a metallic shield---these people don’t even dare to look at the camera, it’ s almost as if they were embarrassed to be caught doing this. The best scenes are the ones where the job demands real skill, and the thing they are working either looks vaguely or exactly like a car. They become like dancers in a ballet that never ends. At times it gets a little hypnotic; you begin to wonder about their day dreams, and imagine the untold other half of their lives.

Elevator to the Gallows * (1958) - Malle
This was Louis Malle’s first film. He cleverly puts the murder right up front which creates an entire new dynamic for the story. The guy commits the perfect murder---except for one minor error. He dashes back to fix it, leaving the keys in the ignition; and ends up getting trapped in an elevator when they turn off the power for the night. When he gets out, a young thug has gone on a crime spree using his identity. He can’t alibi out of a major crime without volunteering for another---talk about being between a rock and a hard place. Best thing about this film was Jeanne Moreau who was waiting for him. She sees his car streak by in the street with a beauty in the passenger side and assumes, not only has he chickened out on the plan to kill her husband; but he has dumped her and simply gone off with a younger woman. She walks the street at night revisiting all their old familiar haunts, slightly crazed and desperate, accompanied by Miles Davis’ wailing trumpet---this is so detached from the story it feels like it belongs to another film.

★★★½

Love at First Fight (2014) - Calley
This is a sly mediation about climate disruption with romance, depending on your tastes, either in the foreground or background. France’s decline is indicated where the only job options available for young people are fast food franchises (the zero hour business model) or the army (muscle for overseas investments). The young woman dropped out of her university program (and a very lucrative future) of future analysis and marketing trends when it occurred to her, hanging a diploma on the wall stating she could see the future was too absurd to even contemplate. Her career goal now is prepare for the apocalypse by making it into one of the army’s elite special force units. The guy has no interest in the army and follows her into the summer orientation program just to be around her. He of course, is a blue ribbon candidate who accumulates promotions in whatever he does, while she begins to collect demerit points. She is way too intelligent; pointing out the fly in the ointment to every training exercise. It begins to dawn on her, if she wants any future in the army she is going to have to ask for the regulation lobotomy---Sir!

You’re sleeping, Nicole (2014) - Lafleur
With her parents on vacation Nicole has the whole house all to herself and nothing really to do except hang out with her best friend after work. A couple of years out of high school and she is still unsure what she wants to do for the rest of her life. A heat wave makes it impossible for her to sleep, so she wanders around her tree-lined neighbourhood at night. The black and white photography really captures how exquisite the air conditioned evening feels after an unbearably hot and sticky day. Unfortunately, her older brother also profits from their parents absence to move in his band and turn the house into a recording studio; placing the only interesting guy within miles behind the drum kit in the living room. This is cute and poetic.

A touch of sin (2013) - Zhangke
This could also be called corruption city. This is four heartbreak stories from the precariat. The violent economic system we live with that ennobles thugs and promotes thuggery is not the problem; capitalism is only a problem when the poorest of the poor are driven to despair and use same violence that is visited daily upon them---only then do we get moral outrage about criminality.

One story has a villager slowly losing it. He embarrasses a multi-millionaire (someone he went to village school with) with a question at a photo-op (he pocketed the village mine free of charge and now travels with a private jet) the reaction is immediate, after the welcoming crowd disperses, one of his bodyguards beats him unconscious with a ceremonial ground breaking spade, forever giving him the comical new moniker of Mr. Golf. There are a couple of instances of sketchy CGI in the film, but lots of languid compositions and unhurried scenes that are a joy to savour.



★★★★

My dinner with Andre (1981) - Malle
When Wally was a kid, he rode around in checkered cabs and dreamt of making great art---as an adult, he only grubs for money. He gets wrangled into a dinner with a former hot shot theatre director who has fallen into obscurity. He has been avoiding him like the plague but since he gave him his start in the business, he is somewhat obligated to accept. His goal is just to endure the evening. He comes equipped with a secret weapon, during any lull in the conversation he’ll just pepper him with question the dinner will be over in no time.

However, sometime after the main course, he realizes Andre’s kooky avant-garde experiments actually serve a purpose, to discover authentic living representations of life and to chip aggressively away at the pretense. Some of the open absurdities that Andre points out strike a chord with Wally. The obligation of each individual is to live your life and not just endure it. Long after the thrills are gone, you continue to inhale and exhale from bad habit. This moment is signalled by a three-shot: Andre’s deepest self appears in the mirror behind him and Wally is actually having a genuine one to one connection.

Disobedience (2017) - Lelio
I was pretty much hooked within the opening minutes: a frail Rabbi is giving a sermon about angels (someone who accepts his wisdom) and beasts (someone who rejects his great erudition) then he collapses on the pulpit. Cut to a photography studio with a woman taking pictures of another kind of holy man (and rebel) all his talismans are tattooed on his body. She is interrupted by a phone call; has anonymous sex with someone she just met in a bar; goes for an ice skate; sits down on a bench then tears her sweater … a Hasidic gesture of mourning, meaning the old man has died and she was connected to him in some way. This also signals a woman with an extraordinary life journey. This is a very subtle film with repressed body language, small lightning and musical cues; listen to the way the people wish her a long life at the beginning of the film (why the hell are YOU here?) and listen to McAdams say goodbye at the end.



[color=#222222][font=MS Gothic]


My dinner with Andre (1981) - Malle
When Wally was a kid, he rode around in checkered cabs and dreamt of making great art---as an adult, he only grubs for money. He gets wrangled into a dinner with a former hot shot theatre director who has fallen into obscurity. He has been avoiding him like the plague but since he gave him his start in the business, he is somewhat obligated to accept. His goal is just to endure the evening. He comes equipped with a secret weapon, during any lull in the conversation he’ll just pepper him with question the dinner will be over in no time.

However, sometime after the main course, he realizes Andre’s kooky avant-garde experiments actually serve a purpose, to discover authentic living representations of life and to chip aggressively away at the pretense. Some of the open absurdities that Andre points out strike a chord with Wally. The obligation of each individual is to live your life and not just endure it. Long after the thrills are gone, you continue to inhale and exhale from bad habit. This moment is signalled by a three-shot: Andre’s deepest self appears in the mirror behind him and Wally is actually having a genuine one to one connection.
I just watched this again last night and agree with you here. It's a great film, and the dialog is so well put across, as if it's a bedtime story. A thing I noticed was Wally's slightly curious distraction with the waiter, and Gregory's very attentive smile towards anything Wally has to say, even if it's a rebuttal. Such a class movie.



the big short



A group of outsiders find out that the housing market is about to crash and tries to bet on its failure. But its not all fun for them having predicted the doomsday rightfully.

How to make an Oscar movie that is genuinely a contender ? I am talking about the movies that could have a strong presence in the big five categories aka picture, director, actor, actress and screenplay and not Oscar baits. The relatively easiest way is to make a period movie set in early to late 20th century and it should focus on some important events but most importantly it should realize that time period well. The more budget put into it the more chances are that the movie will be nominated for more oscars. The more modern you get with your movies the harder it is for academy to reward the movie in a major way. Because the modern you get the normal the production design , the costumes etc. becomes. So the stories and performances have to bear all the weight. The concept of prestige filmmaking is very interesting. The terms prestige and money and risk go hand in hand. Because prestige projects are highly ambitious and more often than not they fail. Most of the times prestige projects when they fail are commercial bombs. Thats when you get a DiCaprio movie. There was this term called Tom Cruise movie. Which is essentially a result of brand development. You have a certain type of audience and to keep them coming back to your movies you give them what they want. Tom cruise played himself in different settings. Maybe thats because he is not that good of an actor. But DiCaprio is cleverer and a better actor. So he plays himself but with different costumes and make up and most importantly he collaborates only with top tier directors. He waits if they are not available. But not every actor can afford to wait because their box office draw and star power drops with each year they don't make a movie and most importantly the director wouldn't wanna work with them or the producers. Jake Gyllenhaal can't wait for Nolan to hire him because if he doesn't do other movies he might not be a best choice when Nolan did want to hire him. But the exception to the rule is DiCaprio. Who until now is able to maintain his star power just based on his name. He knows his boundaries as an actor and as a bankable star and he is using it. The investors of Tarantino's next movie are not dumb to invest 100 million based on DiCaprio/Pitt name if they don't have concrete evidence that people will show up to the movie.

But what do you do if your name is bankable with certain uncertainty and not all top directors want to work with you. A director like Innaritu could have gotten a similar performance from Bale but when he has DiCaprio, a guaranteed box office draw waiting to work with him ,why would he risk a box office failure and hire bale ? For all we know it could turn into a surprise hit like life of pi or gravity but it might not.

Christian bale has a 100 million price tag attached to him. Given the right subject matter and public appeal, a studio is willing to spend money with him as lead. But the only problem here is that a top tier director need to be available. Steven Spielberg is not gonna be a hired gun just because a studio finds the project appealing. He will check all his criteria and see if the movie meets them. Exodus was stuck with Spielberg for a long time before Ridley Scott directed it . Ridley Scott is much more loose with his choices and he payed the price.So Christian bale knows that just because he is worth 100 million doesn't mean he should ruin his bankability by working with subpar directors on subpar scripts.Because all it takes for his price tag to plummet is two 100 million dollar movies to bomb badly and make 40 million each that are commercially aimed.

Thats how we end up with movies like the big short. If they couldn't find someone to play Michael burry I am not sure how the movie could have worked. The brilliance of Christian bale career choices is that he is choosing ambitious projects with low budget and projects with free money. The promise is a movie with 100 million attached to it. They are willing to burn the money so they could tell the story of Armenian genocide in a epic way. But to sell the movie to distributers to put in theaters they need a star. So only for that purpose christian bale chose to make the movie. Thats just nuts. Thats crazy. Especially in an industry like Hollywood where every movie you make effects your brand for better or worse.But he does it anyway. He does however is in my opinion in top 5 box office stars. Because, even brad Pitt couldn't sell a movie like Allied and Matt Damon bombed with suburbicon and Downsizing. So its not like all other stars are succeeding continuously. He still has some gas left in his tank in terms of box office appeal.

This movie is what wolf of wall street should have been. There is moral compass through out the movie where as WOWS is an endorsement for debauchery , anarchy and anti social behavior.

One more thing to point out in this movie is that when christian bale was nominated for Oscar for this performance I heard two opposing points of view. One of them is well he is not in it for long and he just looks sad and so they are basically attacking his screen time and performance. The other view is Steve carrell is the most memorable character in the movie.

Here is the thing, any moron can scream and shout in every scene with funny dialogues. But only very few actors can play a character that is as challenging as his performance in the big short. There is no vanity in the role. What he is doing is the complete dismantling of star image and celebrity. A movie star is playing a role where in you can't even recognize him. Very very few actors can do what he is doing. None of the movie stars can do what he is doing. What this does is give the control over performance to actor and not rely too much on script and director. Good script and director are not part of your biology. They are part of your privilege. Its your position that is allowing you to collaborate with them. Just because Steve Carrell is the voice of reason and outrage in the movie doesn't mean his performance is great.

Here is the thing, its not Oscar for best written role or role with most heart or actor who used his bankability to make a prestige movie a box office success or actor who is not good looking. It is Oscar for best performance. As for this movie I highly recommend it to people with brain and people who wanna see wolf of wall street with some real balls. Wolf of wall street falls exactly into where Wall Street wants general public to think about them. A place of greed, excess , sex and drugs and debauchery. But that doesn't help anyone. The real stuff which they don't want you to know is in the big short. Wall street will laugh at you if you see WOWS and think now I know the greed in wall street.Because you are at exactly the same place where you are before watching the movie. But the big short actually works.





Monkey Business (McLeod,1931)
I first came across Marx Brothers around 2013 when I watched Duck Soup, which instantly became my favorite comedy and remains such to this day. I've enjoyed many other laughs through their other films- Horse Feathers, Night at The Opera, A Night in Casablanca, Animal Crackers, Coconuts, but Monkey Business is the next best thing. Jam packed with laughs- Grucho is at his best and the puppet stunt with Harpo had me dying. Even the side story with Zeppo was decent enough when surrounded by the other antics. 2nd best Marx Brothers film



The Disaster Artist (Franco, 2017)
The three stand out points for this film:
1. Constant Entertainment Value
2. James Franco's Heartfelt performance as Tommy Wiseau
3. The Brilliant Adapted Screenplay

All this alongside a star studded cast, perfectly casted down to the supporting roles, created a great high energy biopic (kinda). I say kinda since the film does feel like it's equally focused on Greg and his evolution through different stages of his relationship with Tommy. By the end it feels like you know the characters and their motives well, despite the ominous and never revealed background of Tommy. This is probably my 4th favorite of 2017, however I feel like this film and It will be the longest remembered.




Also great post @thracian dawg, thoroughly enjoyed reading your thoughts on those films
__________________
Yeah, there's no body mutilation in it



Don’t Draft Me, I Watch Anime!

Mystic River (Eastwood, 03)

Let’s get this out of the way first: Eastwood’s filmography isn’t great. For every Unforgiven (‘92) there’s three The Trouble with the Curve (‘12). He’s definitely a quantity over quality kind of guy. However, Mystic River is definitely in his top five.

At its core, the film is an interesting character study on trauma. Davey (Robbins) deals with childhood abuse, Jimmy (Penn) deals with his daughter’s murder, and Sean (Bacon) deals with his wife leaving him.

Based off the Dennis Lehane novel of the same name, the emotion really works. We’re thrown into this Northeast town that feels real. Sean Penn is the star of the show doing some of the best work of his career. Not to be outdone, both Robbins and Gay Harden deliver outstanding performances with such muted idiosyncrasies, they completely disappear. A particularly big shout out however must go to Tom Stern (The Changeling) for beautifully capturing everything. This is Eastwood’s most visually memorable film, no matter how lazily edited the final film becomes.

This is compounded by the fact that Mystic River’s biggest flaw is there’s too much of it. It’s great that this film opens with the main flashback and doesn’t sporadically cut to it throughout, however it still tries to force feed you information multiple times. The last ten minutes are totally redundant and not needed. If you’ve watched this recently, you’ll understand when I say: it should have just ended on the sidewalk.

Despite this, it’s still well worth your time. It’s a solid Northeast crime story, and what can I say? I’m a sucker for it.

-



Dunkirk



During world war 2 ,British army was sent to help the allied forces into France. But once France was flooded with germans British army decided to retreat back into England to protect their island nation. Germans took advantage of this situation and started attacking the retreating enemy using air strike on the beaches of Dunkirk. This story follows a young soldier's journey through this extraordinary circumstances.

What makes Christopher Nolan different from other directors is that his movies have just the right amount of smartness to let the audience in on the secret and make them think he is clever. There are tons of movies which are very hard to get into and which are very smart. But if the audience are not in on the smartness of the movie, they feel dumb and left out.A friend of mine compared it to this question " by drawing a single line, make this equation true 1+1+1 = 142"...the answer to that is make one of "+" number 4 and you make the equation true. This question if you have never heard before will make you feel smart and in exactly the same way you like Nolan for making you feel that way. The key here is its not too complicated. Even for a person with no college degree, this thing is super simple. You do that enough times and then you make a movie like interstellar and try and break it down with examples, so that layman can understand and people will be willing to take the ride with you. Thats a gift. Its not something a director can come up with in fluke. Something like Annihilation has much less action and motion and kinetic energy to it that even the high concepts sort of make people not want to watch it in cinema.

I have never had any hope that any other filmmaker can occupy the same space as Nolan in terms of pushing those emotional buttons with their movies that Nolan does so often, until I saw Logan by James Mangold. Even though it lacked in perceived complexity of a typical Nolan film, nonetheless it is a very impressive piece of filmmaking.Some themes that kind of reminded me of a Nolan film are the dementia of professor X or the dour dark mental state of Logan. All those are extremely reminiscent of a Nolan film but not too much to the point of copying a Nolan film. Thats very important because critics can easily sniff out if a filmmaker is inspired by or copying or doing his own thing with a movie. Thats the very reason I am super excited for the ford v Ferrari movie by James Mangold because its a movie about winning at the expense of lives. People die left and right until Ford is able to make the fastest car that can beat Ferrari. The pure nature of racing doesn't leave any room for faking the victory. So the cerebral quality that the story lends itself to need a strong hand at helm to direct the movie and I think James Mangold can do it.

Coming back to Dunkirk , the most fascinating thing about it is there is a sense of gloom and fear and real horror that is captured in the movie. The sight of thousands of soldiers on the beach knowing that its not a drill and all of them know that its not safe for them there is kind of interesting cinematically. People say that the movie is about war and that it captured the essence of what its like being in war and its not about characters to the point of some people mocking saving private saying "you don't have long speeches of soldiers telling about their kids back home" but the there has to be a different way in sync with the tone of this movie to convey those emotions. Lot of movies ask you to care for characters just by showing the position they are in with no character background but for some reason we don't give them a pass where as we do for a movie by Christopher Nolan. How about this , don't give me character backgrounds but at least make me care for them. Thats your duty as director to do that and if you don't like back ground sob stories. But there is too much chaos in the movie that is not cinematic. Audience are selling themselves and their logic the movie by rationalizing. As a cherry on top Nolan puts his time intercutting style mesh on the movie , so it doesn't feel like Nolan is pandering to Oscar voters for an Oscar. He still stuck to his signature directing style . All in all its a good movie but not great and this is the first time the time intercutting felt like a gimmick as opposed to many of his other movies where it was much more cohesive.



The invitation



A man is on his way to the house of his ex-wife living in Los Angeles hills with some wealthy person and his current girlfriend is accompanying him to that house. One key concern or oddity the man has regarding this invitation is that its out of the blue. The last communication they had was several years ago. So the man feels weird about it. All his ex-wife's and his friends were invited as well to the party. As the movie goes it becomes more and more interesting.

I think the key aspect of this movie that is so appealing to me is the somber tone. There is certain melancholy to it along with dread.It all builds up to a finale that is just so worth it.

Spoilers

So the protagonist breaks up with his wife because their son drowns due to negligence . This effects them differently. He tries to meet new women and start a relationship and try and stay as normal as possible. But the wife on the other hand meets some guy and they go off to South America / Mexico and joins a cult. Any cult is weird in the sense they want people to follow what they preach. Someone who is the head of a cult has certain desire to have power over others and the weak usually want someone who they can follow. So this supply and demand sort of fits perfectly. So basically this cult that they join has a leader whose preachings are slowly uncovered in the movie. Not the actual person per se but what his ex-wife learned from the cult. Initially we see through a footage shown to the guests on a laptop that the cult makes people acquainted with the idea of death and normality of death and then when the protagonist sneaks through the house he comes across a laptop that shows him how the cult leader sort of preaches more about death. So it appears that the cult destroys the will to live in their followers. Over the course of the movie we find out that the two other guests at the party are in fact members of the same cult and they lost someone. One is a middle aged widower and the other is a emotionally and mentally unstable woman. So the final and main reveal is that all this cult members in order to let go of their pain decide to sacrifice all the guests and kill themselves as well. I am not sure about the last part but killing the guests is certainly their main reason behind inviting them . They feed them like guinea pigs and try and sacrifice them.

The genius in direction is the way the story unravels.The protagonist having known his ex-wife and the things that happen earlier in the movie including a bizarre scene where the female member of the cult propositions him in a weird way sort of smells something is wrong. He can't quite figure out what it is but during the final moments before the planned sacrifice all his instincts forces him to act. The way the story interweaves grief , sorrow and oddity of the circumstances is brilliant and all this culminates in a horror sequence. I didn't like the reveal of all the houses in Los Angeles hills taking part in this sacrifice. But up until that point it is very well done and interesting.



The prestige



What starts as a professional curiosity between two budding magicians turns into a deadly rivalry when the wife of one magician is accidentally killed during a live performance .

The setting of the movie is very gloomy. Its set in 19th century. What about 19th century is unique ? People have become much more civilized by that point and there is lot of innovation happening left and right. From tiny spoons all the way to automobiles. Some innovations that are temporary and some that are still being used right now. The interesting thing about this time period is that people can be what they want to be but society is much more harsher to anyone who tries to be famous but doesn't earn it. That's where we enter into the novel by Christopher priest based upon which the movie was made. This is the perfect line of work that encompasses the time period. Magicians need to come up with some tricks and audience don't wanna know their tricks but as long as the act is interesting enough audience will appreciate and if it sucks the feedback is quite quick. Audience will shout at you. Audience don't wanna believe that the act is fake and are willing to give into the magic.

The question would be,if the time period is so volatile and elemental and tribal in terms of innovation then why do we even need a conflict between two people to tell this story ? well, without the conflict between two specific characters there would be a mass conflict which would ultimately be a chaos. You don't want multiple characters fighting with each other. That's chaos. So the conflict at the core of the story is very reminiscent of conflict between Tesla and Edison but since Edison has lot of goons working for him that wouldn't make for a more pointed conflict if its exactly like that . The most pointed conflict is one on one. And also a conflict that is between two up and comers rather than between an establishment and an individual. Is there a Nolan spin to the story ? I would say no. This in my opinion is the most distinct story Nolan has ever told. Most of the his other movies have a very strong stamp of Nolan on them. But the prestige is the only one which was able to transcend that. The time period sort of made it impossible for Nolan to put his stamp on it. It almost becomes science fiction at the end but the through line of sacrifice for the sake of art and glory is very evident. That is the crux of the story.

The characters of angier and borden are very similar to hugh jackman and christian bale. Bale is more talented than Jackman but Jakckman is a showman and he sings and dances and kind of presents himself very well compared to bale who doesn't do much interviews. That's why they are so different from each other. Its a very impressive movie. I think it is one of the few movies which was able to deconstruct ambition along with Black Swan. Because a lot of people forget this but people who achieve glory always have incredible number of hours of preparation behind them. They never start from scratch at 30 yrs. This movie shows that both angier and borden are doing apprenticeship at various magicians and trying to make a name for themselves..so its not an unbelievable leap to having their own shows. these guys have amassed lot of tricks over the years. Its definitely worth a watch.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
Terrifying Girls' High School: Animal Courage (1973) -




I'm so REKT! This was sooo good. Schoolgirls are taking off their clothes, fencing (there's even a Medieval sword fight!) and creating school gangs, while a domina-teacher with a whip, school's perverted headmaster, and a priest mob rapist use them, and shiiiiiz. LEGITTTT. On a more serious note, the subversiveness is really strong in this one. The school and teachers are portrayed as extremely useless, and at the end all this institutional oppression is brutally exposed! PS: The spaghetti-like music slays!

Terrifying Girls High School: Delinquent Convulsion Group (1973) -




Don't fug with Reiko Ike or you're gonna have some BULLETZ FOR DINNA BEEYOTCH!

Terrifying Girls' High School: Women's Violent Classroom (1972) -




Miki Sugimoto versus Reiko Ike! A duel of the decade! Norifumi Suzuki always delivers the sleaziest shizz, and it's not any different this time. I need more of this shizz in my life. At last finished the series. Phenomenal! 8/10! Would watch again.

Thief of Reality (2001) -




Sinister Greek mythos meet contemporary art. The effect is, as expected, outstanding.

Belladonna of Sadness (1973) -




I don't know, man. The animation was trippy and psychedelic and stuff, but that's all.

Legend of the Mountain (1979) -




The first two hours were the droney Zen metaphysics I always fought for, but then the last hour came and it was just decent. I mean, it had some elements and ideas that were explored better in other films like Chinese Ghost Story (I'm a sucker for this kinda sh*t, muddafugga), and so many subplots, characters, ideas and it was so chaotic. Gimme my beloved ghost lady back, gimme that music, I want a A Touch of Zen-like ending, not this chaos, bleough!

Hanging Garden (2005) -




A little bit frustrating at first, but I got into it. A lot of unconventional camera angles.

The Sun and the Moon (2008) -




An okayish experimental film. Expected much more from it given its place on the list of best movies of the decade on some hipster site.

They Came to a City (1944) -




A very interesting concept, but wasn't a fan of the exalted monologues, and felt it all could've been done much, much better.

You Were Never Really Here (2017) -




Pretty good. It's as heavy as it should, and that atmosphere... I can see a trend in American cinema, and I like it.

I haven't seen anything for two days now, but I'm already catching up... watching another pinku eiga!
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.



Annihilation (2018)

Probably not quite as visually stunning as it was meant to be, and the characters are a draaag, but it’s still ambitious and pretty.

Split (2016)

Eh. Entertaining at times; silly at times; not totally run of the mill. Maybe I'm being too harsh. :/

The Woman in Black (2012)

Atmosphere is expectedly good and murky, though there are a few too many OTT bits and predictable jump clichés for it to remain effective for very long. Perhaps just me, but dancing monkey toy shaking maracas isn’t too unsettling (was very entertained though).

The Babadook (2014)

A cool metaphorical horror mystery unraveling around a powerhouse of a lead.

Don’t Breathe (2016)

Really loved the ‘villain,’ and the plot lends itself to a lot of simple Hitchcockian tension (minus the silly dog in the car scene).

The Witch (2015)

A unique atmosphere with a really authentic period feel, beautifully written dialogue, and a great eerie score. It’s bound to get even better with rewatches.
__________________




“I was cured, all right!”
Beduino 2016 Directed by Júlio Bressane ★★★★

Black Mass 2015 Directed by Scott Cooper ★★

Dark Crimes 2016 Directed by Alexandros Avranas ★★★★

Elite Squad 2007 ‘Tropa de Elite’ Directed by José Padilha ★★
Elite Squad: The Enemy Within 2010 ‘Tropa de Elite 2’ Directed by José Padilha ★★★

Cries and Whispers 1972 ‘Viskningar och rop’ Directed by Ingmar Bergman ★★★★★
Scenes from a Marriage 1973 ‘Scener ur ett äktenskap’ Directed by Ingmar Bergman ★★★★★
Saraband 2003 Directed by Ingmar Bergman ★★★★★

Beyond the Hills 2012 ‘După dealuri’ Directed by Cristian Mungiu ★★★★★
4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days 2007 ‘4 luni, 3 săptămîni și 2 zile’ Directed by Cristian Mungiu ★★★★

Atomic Blonde 2017 Directed by David Leitch ★★

Once Upon a Time in Anatolia 2011 ‘Bir zamanlar Anadolu'da’ Directed by Nuri Bilge Ceylan ★★★★★
Winter Sleep 2014 ‘Kış Uykusu’ Directed by Nuri Bilge Ceylan ★★★★★

Crimson Peak 2015 Directed by Guillermo del Toro ◘

Toy Story of Terror! 2013 Directed by Angus MacLane ★★

La Haine 1995 Directed by Mathieu Kassovitz ★★★★

Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters 1985 Directed by Paul Schrader
★★★★

Werckmeister Harmonies 2000 ‘Werckmeister harmóniák’ Directed by Béla Tarr ★★★★★
The Turin Horse 2011 ‘A torinói ló’ Directed by Béla Tarr ★★★★★

Sidewalls 2011 ‘Medianeras’ Directed by Gustavo Taretto ★

The Sea of Trees 2015 Directed by Gus Van Sant ★★

My Voyage to Italy 1999 ‘Il mio viaggio in Italia’ Directed by Martin Scorsese ★★★★★




◘ Atrocity
★ Very Bad
★★ Bad (Sometimes interesting)
★★★ Good
★★★★ Very Good
★★★★★ Great
★★★★★ Masterpiece

-Unfortunately I'm not having time this week to write about the movies.