Movie Tab II

Because.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Could't get tired of that song.


Probably my favorite sequence!

__________________
"This Would Sharpen You Up And Make You Ready For A Bit Of The Old Ultra-Violence."

Saying a scene in a Tarr film should have been shorter is like saying to your SO he or she should be uglier. Quoting Tarr himself "Slow is freakin' good".

I find it really surprising how people take allegorical, or poetic movies and nitpick about such irrevelant trifles,


The bloody film was too fast-paced! Tarr has to take it easy, or he's going to become another Michael Bay!

__________________
San Franciscan lesbian dwarves and their tomato orgies.

It's not a nitpick, it's an observation. I didn't really mind it.

I find this to be a perfect movie. The dialog is impeccably written as this was handled by Mann himself. His pet project. So much technique is on display here, from the camera work with curiously metered positions and movements, to the night time street photography. The set design echos an emerald gemstone in contrast with the overall diamond theme of glassy white (a local bar for the thief's operations have green tinted gels on the windows).

The action and gun play is handled much like Mann's Manhunter, where a few jump cuts are employed to give the carnage an other worldly and slightly out of time effect. Definitely a precursor in style, this may be his most stylish in the most subtle of ways because it is spread out much more, and tastefully placed, as opposed to a jam packed array of non stop visuals like Dante Spinotti did for the look of his 1986 masterpiece.

James Caan takes the character of Frank and makes him fun, menacing and believable. His no nonsense street smart maturity is only undone by his pained past. Outbursts are seldom an issue unless it involves any obstacle standing in his way to orchestrate the life he wants. His love interest (played by Tuesday Weld - in an equally respectable performance) wants kids but cannot bear children. After being turned away from an adoption agency for his served jail time, he turns to a crime boss for help reluctantly in the acquisition of an illegal adoption. Setting up his real life, and doing one more big job for the evil lord (Robert Prosky - Darnell from Christine) is the plan, and then he wants out, to live the rest of his time with his family, financially comfortable.

The icy resolve in this film is so poetic and intense that I almost had to stop the film and breath for a few minutes. Mann wrangles the very best film score ever completed by German Electro-hippes Tangerine Dream with what can only be described as highly dramatic old wave. The music and sound design builds this movie brick by brick with a fascinating urgency and realness, despite the almost trance-like allure of the cinematography and editing.

The process of breaking into the building and vault are executed with such a precision and grace that it really is like you are there with them. The crisp editing and score continue to bring about a stomach sick nausea, with the viewer waiting for something to go wrong.

This is a beautiful crime drama that looks amazing, is acted flawlessly, and may be Michael Mann's very finest hour.

I highly recommend that this is watched in an HD format with a very loud surround sound set-up. I had this thing cranked and it was amazing!

If his next film doesn't have an hour long shot of an old man angrily smashing potatoes I'm gonna be pissed.

The Turin Horse is his final movie.

LOVE this movie.. I also love how James Caan's character has a code of ethics, even as a criminal.

The Martian



An astronaut is stranded on mars due to natural occurrence thought to be dead but using his skills and personality he tries to survive and reconnect with Earth.

Matt Damon is an interesting actor. He is the only actor who is the closest to Dicaprio in terms of career and high profile nature than any other actor. Someone like Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt are famous due to their looks and high profile celebrity that they have created. Johnny Depp kind of became a default movie star in early/late 90s when there is no one else to occupy that vacuum and Brad Pitt had some celebrity but it sort of blew up with his marriage to Angelina Jolie. Its really Matt Damon and DiCaprio who are popular because of movies and not just because of celebrity. Even George Clooney is famous among Hollywood circles for transition from Tv to movies. So his Tv friends would rather root for him than some movie star who got lucky with Titanic.But he is not this major box office draw. He is celebrity famous. You gotta be handsome and do perfume ads in Europe to be famous.

Matt Damon has worked with all the high profile directors like Spielberg, Scorsese, Nolan , Gilliam etc. His career sort of rivals that of DiCaprio but there are two problems. 1) Matt Damon doesn't have a titanic in his resume 2) His acting skills are not suited for epic filmmaking. This heavily handicapped his consistency. You will not be hired by Innaritu to make Revenant if you look like Matt Damon. Because no one will believe him as a frontiersman because he shows up at Jimmy Kimmel shows and dances on Ellen. I can understand the need for him to do that because lot of people don't know this but Bourne identity sort of made Matt Damon relevant and his career was on a downward spiral up until that movie.

Then why does Matt Damon has only 170K tagged pictures on instagram where as DiCaprio has 2 million tags on instagram ? whats wrong with this picture ? well machismo, misogynistic roles and association with top directors consistently is whats missing. Matt Damon just doesn't fit in period roles. Especially 19th century or early 20th century roles.More over he does not have a manly screen presence required for dramas like DDL or Bale. So it sort of puts him completely in a different plateau than DiCaprio. He doesn't have a single role like Patrick Bateman or Jordan Belfort. I think the more important point is that he cannot be an anti hero with his screen presence and dialogue delivery.

I clearly remember during the 2014/15 Oscars this movie and revenant are being campaigned for by 20th century fox. Martian sadly was considered more as a well done commercial movie with positive message and revenant was an unflinching prestige picture.So even fox kinda given this movie second priority and of course having a commercial director like Ridley Scott doesn't help.All this points aside this movie is well done space drama with burst of positiveness. This movie is much more about the personality of astronaut played by Damon and teamwork to get one man safely back to earth. Its well done with no risks except jumping right into the story rather than setting it up. By the time the movie starts we are moments away from taking off and its pretty refreshing to see a movie not taking time of introduce the characters.

It always surprises me to see how accurate the executives in Hollywood are. They know whom to attribute the success of a movie to. For example, they know that the success of Logan has everything to do with James Mangold, so fox gave him reigns to make ford v Ferrari with 2 of the biggest stars right now. They know that Mad max success has nothing to do with Tom Hardy and everything to do with direction and visuals of the movie. So he wasn't being offered 100 million dollar epics.He had to either hop on the anti hero superhero band wagon with venom or make interesting projects. He started doing both. Think about it, a guy who had revenant and mad max in the same year, is doing a movie with Josh Trank. How crazy is that ? They know that the box office success of aviator/gangs of New York/ departed/ inception/shutter island/wolf of Wallstreet/revenant is solely due to Dicaprio. So, for the most part if a project is being made of the scale of these I don't think studios would even wanna give it to anybody. They either wait for DiCaprio or shelve the project. So actors like Matt Damon/Christian bale are right behind him in the pecking order and they get leftovers. So, they either have to choose to wait for projects he has turned down or go in a completely different direction. Luckily Damon doesn't suite most of those parts. But Bale suits them but Bale decided to pursue a thespian career with sprinkles of prestige risky movies. Damon, since he is not a thespian is doing movies with well written scripts and action movies in between.All these sort of handicapped him from being consistent. I think it is absolutely possible to be as successful as DiCaprio without having titanic under your belt. Will smith between 1997 and 2010 is the prime example.Its just that hollywood is too scared to take chances in establishing stars through auteur route and instead choose to put them in giant popcorn movies like battlefield/John Carter/King Arthur and see what sticks.


So all in all its a good movie with heartwarming scenes and perfect casting in Matt Damon. But it doesn't take much risks.Its performance at 2015 oscars aside the message of team work and ignoring the differences is well conveyed. Supporting cast on space has nothing much to do but the cast on earth is very good. A simple way to explain this movie even though its a blockbuster is martian is like a fruit juice where as movies like the dark knight or wolf of wall street or revenant are more like drugs. You know they are bad for you but you can't help yourself but use them.And also something like frozen movie gives you happiness or a well made comedy.But you get the same thing by chatting with old friends or eating your favorite food or visiting a new place. Where as a cocktail of misogyny + masculinity + thrill + criminal behavior mix is something very rare. You can't get that in a Disney ride. You need something that only some movies can give.

Sahara(2005)



A pair of adventure seeking and treasure hunting brothers get mixed up with a UN doctor treating a plague in rural Africa and are pitted against a warlord in Africa.

There are few interesting articles about this movie because of its budget and box office performance.Its widely considered as one of biggest flops of all time and it kinda deserves that moniker.I am always dumbfounded at some of these movies and can't understand why someone would green-light movies like this/Stealth/Battleship. So why was this movie made? Well in 2005 studios still have no idea of what makes blockbuster money. So they hired a good looking male movie star for American audience and a European actress for European audience. It’s the ideal romantic pair from business point of view. The main goal of these movies is to make them for big budget and expect them to rake in 400-500 million dollars.Similar to the mummy or San Andreas or Rampage.They were never aiming for something much more than that. So they need journey men directors aka fixers to run the machine that completes this movie. Which means the movie's inception is riddled with so many unsavory ambitions that its hard to get a great movie at the other end of it .Add to that all the investors wanting to be cooks in the kitchen and you have a recipe for disaster.

That's the main difference between movie like this and something like The revenant. The investors in this movie know that it has to be a hit on its own commercial value. Whereas investors of the revenant know that the movie need help from academy to be a commercial hit.If the revenant was released in summer, I seriously doubt it would have made so much money. Because at that time the movie had to work on its own merit without all the bells and whistles of Oscar glory.

This movie has the structure of an adventure movie with exotic locations and remote places which are not used as a backdrop for films ever before. But the plot is so thin and actors did not help it as well. Its a B movie with 150 million budget. So all these locations don't work. Africa as a backdrop doesn't quite work if its doesn't take place in Egypt.Adventure movies need some amount of obsession in its lead characters and the reveal of the mcguffin has to be worth it. There has to be certain amount of gloom/ risk and danger to it.Leads characters with no obsession and end up stumbling upon locations doesn't make for a great adventure. It cant be like a hobbit movie with gruff stars like McConaughey attached to it . You need guys who know what they are doing. All these are important aspects needed for a movie to work.

So thats the main difference between a DiCaprio movie and movies like these. Its hard for Innaritu to make a revenant with someone like channing tatum because there is no gurantee that his movies will make money and his public image doesnt render itself to something like revenant. With Dicaprio he kept himself open for different kinds of roles and box office is strong. Even actors like Matt Damon and christian bale have to settle with James Mangold because these auteurs that dicaprio keeps making movies with make two kinds of movies a medium budget passion project or a big budget passion project...for medium budget they could hire the best guys for the role. For big budget they can hire box office guarantee dicaprio..so why do they need actors 2,3..on the list when they can get 1. So you are left with ambitious projects with certain amount of risk that are developed at a studio and for the most part are not interesting to auteurs , who develop their own projects. So studios kind of are on the look for directors that are above journey men directors and below Auteurs who recently delivered a good movie hit and then pair them up with writers of this script that have been doing it for quite sometime. And they hire actors 2,3 on the list like Damon and Bale and mount a production of around 100 million. Auteurs don't want studio shepherding on their scripts. They want to develop their own scripts or morph the script to their sensibilities. The Revenant is kind of like this but it veered way off into auteur film making territory. So ultimately a movie cannot be tied in a neat little bow for it to be considered a risky movie.
All these qualities are absent in Sahara. Its not a thrill ride at all. Villain is like a bond villain.

During the promotion for the movie, mcconaughey tirelessly promoted to the key demographics for this movie by appearing at daytona auto race and other locations. But this proves that unless people get hooked on the movie's theme and trailers no promotion by anyone will get them to the theatre. Thats the most unique thing. There is a considerably large movie going audience that are ready to give the movie a shot during oscar season. Those are the one's that will nurture a project and elevate it to a classic status. During summer , most moviegoers want fun. The cast in the movie is neutral.So this movie deserves its financial failure. Its not a blatant cash grab but its not made by passionate talented people.One of those 2 adjectives is missing in the filmmakers of this movie.

Titanic



A movie about a big ship that sinks.

This is where it all began.Until this movie Steven Spielberg was a beloved director in Hollywood and he is the king of Hollywood blockbusters. So, everything worked out. Audience and Hollywood insiders agree that Spielberg is the king of Hollywood.They decided to crown Spielberg with best director Oscar for Schindler's list the same year Jurassic park was released.So they decided that Spielberg can make both kind of movies. But when Titanic came out James Cameron was a rebel director who against all odds and bad publicity delivered with Titanic.The movie was very impactful emotionally. Until then all the blockbusters were children themed, in the sense that children can watch them. But this is the first time a blockbuster was adult themed. Moreover the script of the movie was very weak. Its the scale and directorial achievement that made this movie what it is.

There is certain amount of voyeuristic angle to the way Cameron covers the love story between the leads in this movie. You watch two strangers fall in love in-front of you and they are extremely good looking.You watch the girl being the one taking control of intimacy and there is certain amount of wish fulfillment to the love story. An average Joe is made to feel like a rock-star. But even rock-stars don't get these kind of girls. Here is the thing about rock-stars , the women who throw themselves at rock-stars are mainly attracted to fame and success. They are as easily attracted to a more popular star as they are attracted to him. And also women who sell their self worth for fame and money are also after rock-stars.The wish fulfillment part comes when a respectable well to do non-slutty woman is the one being aggressive in an intimate scenario with a average Joe who seduces her by showing the freedom of life. That's the dream of any guy. No guy feels masculine if he is paying money to have sex with someone , he feels masculine if he is being pursued by women and its even better if those women are decent women as opposed to gold diggers.The chemistry between the leads has certain tragic quality to it because you know the ship is gonna sink. So there is this brooding love story like the brooding character of the dark knight.Its more impressive because this movie was able to achieve this connection over the course of one movie.So you have a tragedy waiting to happen for this intensely passionate lovers.This is one of the reasons why the movie worked so well. This type of love story connects to almost all demographics. All the characters in this movie cover all the demographics of audience.

So what is the impact of this movie ? well , It's a movie that is hated by auteurs but liked by masses. Auteurs hate the simplicity of the movie. But masses like it for what it is.Its a theatrical experience. This movie is reason why I am not a big fan of Leonardo DiCaprio. Until this point in his career he was growing up to be a good adult actor. But after this movie he realized that he struck gold and he changed his course of his career into becoming this superstar who is trying to make movies that are epic and prestigious but also trying to get Oscar for himself and his movies and maintain his box office draw. Because he has seen what happened to Titanic. Even though certain auteurs and their fans hated the movie. For the most part majority of film going public liked it and more people remember it than any other movie from that decade.From that point in his career, he started replicating titanic in terms of Oscar voter appeal and box office success. He succeeded for the most part. How do you get fans of Scorsese on your side ? do a movie with Scorsese. How do you get fans of Tarantino movie on your side ? do a Tarantino movie. How do you get fans of Nolan on your side ? do a Nolan movie. So when a DiCaprio movie is coming out , you have all these fans awaiting his movie . Of course its not like they are directors for hire but he is in a position to take risky roles but he doesn't want to jeopardize his star power for the sake of few challenging roles. So he stuck with the formula that worked. Make the projects as high profile as possible so you get all the attention and then since a great director is at helm, there is no way in hell the movie is gonna disappoint. Thats the key. There is difference when people are excited for a movie like Suicide squad and for a movie like the revenant. In the former example people are excited due to the characters but in the latter they are excited for filmmakers. The reason I hate him so much is because he is eating up lot of roles that otherwise would have gone to other more suitable actors. He is denying others of that opportunity. I for one truly believe that without titanic DiCaprio would not be where he is today. There is no chance in hell he will have such popularity without Titanic.

This movie is worth a watch for the epic scale. It does leave you with a somber mood.But in the end as a movie fan for me it did more harm than good. If it weren't for this movie we wouldn't be talking about DiCaprio the way we are. He would more likely have stuck to Indie movies and occasional big budget movies.

How’d you feel on the ending here? I always thought this movie felt a little short and just sort of ended without much resolution. Obviously Stewart’s passionate speech is great, but it just kinda ended with flat for me.

Yeah I did feel that, very sudden.

Stone (1974) -



An Australian Satanist Biker on drugs (sic!) is a witness to a political killing. Now every biker in their pack faces mortal danger! Good ole times of Ozploitation. I still have to find my personal Ozploitation masterpiece, though.

Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973) -



Jaded rat Robert Mitchum plays a dangerous game with cops and robbers. Rightly cold and unrelenting, but also devoid of greatness.

Egg (2007) -



It took me several years to finish the trilogy (ironically enough this is the first part). Surprisingly heart-warming.

Citizen X (1995) -



Without much exploitation the film manages to portray such terrible murders, and such hard investigation. Max von Sydow appears in only two scenes yet he steals the show.

Spider (1991) -



Borowczyk gone horror with stellar cinematography and exquisitely looking heroine.

Burnt by the Sun (1994) -



In the past I started the film only to turn it off within the first ten minutes at least twice. This time I watched the whole thing. It is a masterpiece.

The Woman in the Rumor (1954) -



The fact Mizoguchi directed Sansho the Bailiff, The Crucified Lovers and this (not as splendid, but still pretty good) movie in the same year is mindblowing! Not to mention the year before he made A Geisha and Ugetsu! This one might be his most feminist film.

The White Reindeer (1952) -



One of the Finnish golden classics. Could've been better!

True Story of Woman Condemned Continues (1975) -
New True Story of Woman Condemned to Hell (1976) -

KINKY

Pretty much the same as the first one. If you watch a film like this, you pretty much know what to expect. The entire trilogy is highly enjoyable. I especially liked the main theme.

The Owl's Legacy (1989) -



A miniseries by Chris Marker on the impact Ancient Greek culture, language, and art had on the rest of the world. A couple of surprising remarks from the talking heads. Marker's style is a little bit dormant here, but his favourite (after a cat) animal reigns in this film!

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) -



Hype! Hype! Hype! Finally a modern sci-fi/action for popcorn eaters I love (ofc I loved Force Awakens too). People nitpicking about plot contrivances are probably the same people who hated a film, because they coudn't "relate to the characters". LOL.

Heroic Trio 2: Executioners (1993) -



I'm not sure if this was as good as the first one. For one, the first part was much crazier, if memory serves. But who cares, this is LEGIT cinema. Anita Mui carving her new mask out of a dinner plate > anything from Marvel I saw.

Red Spell Spells Red (1983) -



Ah, them good ole CAT III black magic flicks. This was not as hideous as Centipede Horror, but still full of scorpions and gore!

Lost Souls (1980) -



That was really freakin' sick, my brother! I'll never be the same! [*] From the director of Man Behind the Sun comes this sleazefest masterpiece! Not for the weak of heart!

School on Fire (1988) -



The last in Ringo Lam's On Fire trilogy and a proof you can make a great film on teenagers/college students (take lessons, Lady Bird!).

Split of the Spirit (1987) -



A very nice unsleazy HK horror movie. It's nothing particularly amazing, but very enjoyable.

From the Pole to the Equator (1987) -



Legit trance! What a wonderful hypnosis! A film made up of bits of pieces of archival footage took all around the world set to minimalist music.

Day for Night (1973) -



A pretty kewl film, but Godard did it 10 years before.

Poem of the Sea (1958) -



The color cinematography looks beautiful. The comparison to the films of Powell & Pressburger is not a complete miss, mind you. However, the film hasn't got enough dream sequences (I blame Socialist Realism, they've still been given more freeway given the thaw after Stalin's death), and the realistic sequences are only alright.

Anna (1994) -



It's great to see a person grow as time passes. And it's interesting to see a piece of history of a country.

The Last Train (2003) -



A pretty gnarly, horrifying, monochrome, foggy anti-war film that tries to find beauty in places and situations so devoid of beauty and hope. The death is portrayed as realistically as possible, and the very ending might be the most moving ending title in the history of cinema.

The Mummy(1999)



An ancient curse is unleashed by a group of treasure hunters in Egypt and they must send it back to the underworld to prevent the extinction of human civilization.

The Mummy has a very distinct tone for a monster movie. There is fun to the movie but at the same time there is dread and real possibility of characters dying. Sahara from 2005 must have taken some notes from this movie on how to make an adventure movie. Brendan Fraser is the perfect fit for the tone the movie was going for. He is handsome and funny at the same time. He kind of captured the know it all guy who you can feel safe around. His character has certain warmth to him.Thrills of the movie strike the right balance of scary and funny. There is no gloom and doom feel to the movie. Its a fun adventure movie.

In a much more serious note the effect this movie had on Brendan Fraser's career is positive and little tragic at the same time. On the positive side, it helped him become a house hold name in US and he did make few Action adventure comedies after this movie. One a tragic note the stunts he performed in this movie and few others had lasting injuries on his body and forced him to be on medication and in turn make fewer movies.

Here is the thing about celebrities and Hollywood. When an actor like Tom Cruise first comes to Los Angeles, he has zero power. He needs to be hired for roles. If he gets a big break, even then to make quality films with quality filmmakers he needs to be hired by them. If he just wanna bank in on his success and work with people he can boss around , then he can pick people. But his career will be dead before he know it because the people that are available to be picked by him are not great filmmakers. So there is always a certain amount of "mentor-ship" or "has to be picked/hired" need for every actor in Hollywood. Even someone like Tom Cruise at this point in his career cannot boss around and ask Christopher Nolan or Scorsese or Spielberg or Tarantino to work with him. He can only speak with them and have a normal conversation where he can suggest working with them but he cannot force them to work with him. They will smile for photos but behind the scenes Nolan might never wanna work with Tom Cruise.

So when Brendan Fraser accused HFPA president of sexual harassment in 2003 it might be shocking for a layman. I mean he starred in a 500 million grossing movie just a year before. So its not like he is some newbie that is being take advantage of . Then how can this be possible. But if you read by above paragraph then you would know that the name of the game is "being chosen or being picked". Its not like a stand up comedian. If you are good at making people laugh you are hired. But it says more about the power structure in Hollywood and how a group of foreign based reporters can influence the star-power of Hollywood and promote stars overseas. HFPA has more influence than you would imagine. Some of the roles for movies are offered to stars with Golden Globe nomination as part of the deal. I wont be surprised if DiCaprio was offered the role in once upon a time in Hollywood with the caveat of a golden globe nomination for his performance by default even before the a single shot of the movie was filmed. Just like nominations for Hugh Jackman in greatest showman or will smith in concussion. They are built into the contract. Some studios launch their Oscar campaign for an actor with golden globe nominations as the starting point.

So this is a peek into the seedy underbelly of Hollywood and how even a star like Brendan Fraser can't escape from the abuses.That being said , if you can leave all this baggage at the door, you most certainly will have a fun time at this movie and it has a very impressive production design.

Also I’m like 78% sure we saw child murder in that film.

OMG that scene was so funny!

LOGAN (Mangold, 2017)

A Marvel movie that isn’t just a set up to the next Marvel movie. Hugh Jackman and Dafne Keen play off each other. Boyd Holbrook is charismatic enough to provide fodder for the pair. The action scenes are shot with both Wolverines (Wolverinis?) moving as fluid and violently as possible; the stakes are certainly raised. I liked it a little less this time due to a bit of clumsy dialogue but I’ll certainly echo everyone else and say it’s definitely worth your time.

.



SOLO: A Star Wars Story (Howard, 2018)

Ron Howard is the most okay-iest director in Hollywood, this film is no different. Are you getting anything bad? Nah. Are you getting anything memorable? Nah. If you’re into Star Wars, you’re probably going to be into it. It’s fun enough for a Saturday afternoon flick, especially with the behind-the-scenes drama we kept hearing about. I have a few more thoughts, but pretty much all of them can summed up by saying: eh, it’s alright.

+.

May (pt ii):

+
Frankenstein (James Whale, 1931)
Hak se wui yi wo wai kwai [Election 2] (Johnnie To, 2006)


Good Night, And Good Luck (George Clooney, 2005)
Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)
Mädchen in Uniform [Maidens In Uniform] (Leontine Sagan & Carl Froelich, 1931)

+
Ai no mukidashi [Love Exposure] (Sion Sono, 2008)
Casino (Martin Scorsese, 1995)
Que Horas Ela Volta? [The Second Mother] (Anna Muylaert, 2015)
Tumultes (Robert Siodmak, 1932)


78/52 aka 78/52: Hitchcock's Shower Scene (Alexandre O. Philippe, 2017)
Ask A Policeman (Marcel Varnel, 1939)
Bridge Of Spies (Steven Spielberg, 2015)
Hak se wui [Election] (Johnnie To, 2005)
Mænd & høns [Men & Chicken] (Anders Thomas Jensen, 2015)
Stretch And Bobbito: Radio That Changed Lives (Bobbito Garcia, 2015)
This Is My Affair (William A. Seiter, 1937)

+
Adventure In Manhattan (Edward Ludwig, 1936)
Eve's Bayou (Kasi Lemmons, 1997)
Kim Bok-nam salinsageonui jeonmal [Bedevilled] (Cheol-soo Jang, 2010)
Putyovka v zhizn [Road To Life] (Nikolai Ekk, 1931)
Sauna aka Evil Rising (Antti-Jussi Annila, 2008)
Seventh Heaven (Henry King, 1937)


Always Goodbye (Sidney Lanfield, 1938)
Danger On The Air (Otis Garrett, 1938)
Dina (Antonio Santini & Dan Sickles, 2017)
Potiche (François Ozon, 2010)
The Animal Kingdom (Edward H. Griffith & George Cukor, 1932)
The Sessions (Ben Lewin, 2012)
We Bought A Zoo (Cameron Crowe, 2011)

+
Creepshow (George A. Romero, 1982)
I Take This Woman (Marion Gering, 1931)


The Old Dark House (James Whale, 1932)

+
Under Western Stars (Joseph Kane, 1938)
Way Down South (Leslie Goodwins & Bernard Vorhaus, 1939)


Double Harness (John Cromwell, 1933)
Funland (Michael A. Simpson, 1987)
Lucky Them (Megan Griffiths, 2013)
Squibs (Henry Edwards, 1935)
Three Legionnaires (Hamilton McFadden, 1937)


Cell (Tod Williams, 2016)
Nightmare Wedding (Jose Montesinos, 2016)

+
Extract (Mike Judge, 2009)
Nihon bundan: Heru doraibâ [Helldriver] original vsn (Yoshihiro Nishimura, 2010)
Sleepaway Camp (Robert Hiltzig, 1983)

Deadpool 2 (David Leitch, 2018) -

There were shreds of potential within the not-as-clever-or-inventive-as-it-thinks original that I'd hoped would be developed further in a follow-up, but even the promise of moderately competent action sequences and an expanded scope in just about every aspect ultimately makes very little difference to how things play out a second time around.

Night on Earth (Jim Jarmusch, 1991) -

Jarmusch delivers another anthology film - this time about five different taxi rides simultaneously taking place in different cities around the world - that juggles a variety of tones across its segments without totally losing consistency (the "Rome" story might be the only weak point if only because of Benigni's sheer obnoxiousness, and even that starts to improve as the story progresses).

Undercover Brother (Malcolm D. Lee, 2002) -

This rapid-fire parody of both blaxploitation and spy movies ends up proving one of the funnier movies I've seen in recent memory, packing a remarkable amount of laughs into its brief runtime and ageing much better than you'd think a comedy of this vintage would.

On Body and Soul (Ildikó Enyedi, 2017) -

A passable romantic drama about two slaughterhouse workers who slowly realise that they keep having the same dream every night. There are some decent moments in the mix that help to sell the story, but nothing that makes it genuinely special.

Down by Law (Jim Jarmusch, 1986) -

I thought this was just okay when I first saw it about a decade ago but I've since warmed up to Jarmusch's distinctive sensibilities and now find it a lot more appreciable.

The Great Gatsby (Baz Luhrmann, 2013) -

I feel like there's an uncanny valley that can set in when a period piece intersects way too hard with ultra-modern filmmaking (Public Enemies being the main example I think of) and this film falls into it hard with Luhrmann's love of hyper-stylised visuals and anachronic musical choices (which reminded me of Speed Racer except in a bad way). Shame since there are a couple of decent performances in the mix.

Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982) -

At this rate, I probably should write something at length about this but I'm not doing it today. Needless to say, I still dig it.

Reversal of Fortune (Barbet Schroeder, 1990) -

A perfectly serviceable based-on-a-true-story legal drama about the seemingly open-and-shut case of a millionaire who allegedly put his wife into a coma. My main interest was in seeing the always-watchable Jeremy Irons in his Oscar-winning role as said millionaire, but I was especially surprised by how good Ron Silver is as his conflicted attorney.

The Omega Man (Boris Sagal, 1971) -

Having read I Am Legend recently, I found this an interesting enough adaptation that stays remarkably faithful in some regards while also making some rather goofy changes in order to build a really pulpy excuse for an Apes-era Charlton Heston to gun and laugh his way through the apocalypse.

Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982) -

Yeah, I watched it again. Deal with it.