Search found 72 matches

by Ricochet
Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:07 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Oh, hey, I like watching movies!

I was worried that, at only 44 posts, this thread doesn't have enough Mongoose in it, but then I checked the first page and the ratio is still pretty alright. :biggrin:

I watched these movies last week:

Bergman's Winter Light (I should learn by heart its original name: Nattvardsgasterna). Piss-poor job I did to really focus on watching this, so a rewatch is compulsory, nonetheless there were gripping scenes even for such a superficial viewing. Seems intimate, profound and classic Bergman.

Avengers. Age of Ultron. Ugh, can it really be called bad? Thing is, I watched it for purposes of munching popcorn and tortilla chips, and even then the entertainment value felt pretty flat. The cast keeps expanding and the latest additions didn't impress me much. This particular franchise feels like it's about to explode completely out of proportions and lose any sense of direction. Meh/10

The Tribe or Plemya. Dangerously good movie, in its gimmick, realism and formalism - it's completely in sign language (and as far as I understand, Ukrainian sign language is pretty distinct on its own), with no subtitles, no nothing, so basically it's bound to redefine what watching a movie is supposed to mean!! - however I'm ultimately disappointed in the approach to the story: miserabilism, fairly hardcore violence and scenes, probably some moral deep within about inherent human cruelty, anyway stuff that should send chills down your spine, but also feeling ugly and shocking for the sake of ugliness and shock and quite exploitative. 6/10

One night Denis Villeneuve's Enemy was on TV and I didn't object to not change the channel and seeing it again. One of my favourite movies of 2013. Not only a good, if unsophisticated adaptation of Saramago's The Double, but also adding some new psychological extra details on its own. It's bleak, introverted and abstract, but for me it still works. With Villeneuve's oeuvre (Incendies, Prisoners, this one) now enrichened with Sicario, I'm starting to feel he can become one of my favourite current directors. 7/10

Stop Making Sense. Tina 10/10. Cool stuff otherwise, especially the Psycho Killer number.

Audition - wat. I was surprisingly less spooked or disturbed by the last 30 minutes (in a horror-shit-my-pants manner or anything) and it was still a bloody weird and near incomprehensible experience. The build up to all that is good, if only very slow and with several scenes feeling really hasty B-movie shlock-like (I mean, this is considered to be his masterpiece and the guy still made 4 or 5 more movies in that same year!). Anyway, I have no idea what I think of this / 10

Third Person (on TV) - oh god this pissed me off big time. First of all, Paul Haggis (Crash), the Oscar winner one) is completely obsessed with multi-story plots and filmmaking (he did the same in this year's Show Me a Hero TV series, which was ok). The film is pretty bland and soapy on its own, but then it lands a "tweeest" that I was stupid enough not to figure out from the freaking title of the movie, but it still made me go berserk when it happened. Seriously, bad feels. 3/10

----

BTW, I have a group on FB for discussing movies, currently dead because nobody cares. But if any of you would like to join and liven it up a bit, lemme know. :beer:
by Ricochet
Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:58 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A Person wrote: Also I've added you to the group already.
?
by Ricochet
Mon Nov 30, 2015 10:30 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I watched a lot of movies the past month, except I've been lazy to write anything about them. In fact, I can almost say I binged French cinema this November - starting with a local screening of this year's Palme D'Or winner, Dheepan; then there was a French Film Festival, at which I barely managed to go see two movies, but which inspired me to search for myself afterwards as many of the screened titles as possible.

There's really a lot of them, so I'll just put them in a spoiler tab:
Spoiler: show
-- Now, as far as Dheepan is concerned, I went in with the expectations of it being a baitwin, considering the immigrants crisis situation (although I don't remember if said crisis boomed that much in Europe at the time of the Cannes awards) and, in this regard, my expectations were exceeded. This is a pretty solid social drama, although at the end it feels like it falls and breaks its note with an action-esque finale (think of the single-shot sequence towards the end of Children of Men).

-- At the Festival, I managed to see an adventurous-in-concept, but not very well executed futuristic satire called Gaz de France and a coming-of-age drama made by actress Melanie Laurent (the girl from Inglorious Basterds, if the reference helps), called Respire, quite melodramatic but also pertinent on the subject of friendships going south, self-destructive teenage behaviour and introvert emotional pressure, until the very last two or three minutes of the movie fell under a very annoying "sudden tweest" cliche.

Then at home, I enjoyed (or not) the following:

-- Une nouvelle amie (or The New Girlfriend), the most recent Francois Ozon movie - a hip & trendy current director that's not easy to describe, but he's mostly risky and creative and yet almost totally within cinematic normal boundaries (I liked his previous Dans le maison, hated his previous Jeune & Jolie and I only remember boobs from his otherwise fairly suspenseful earlier Swimming Pool). This one felt like an equally edgy, if also flimsy comedy. I enjoyed it.

-- Geronimo, a movie I watched half a month ago and totally forgot since. Ghetto tales, sort of. In fact, weirdly enough, perhaps a kind of Romeo & Juliet focusing more on the two rival families fighting each other - and with a female Mercutio-like protagonist that falls in the middle of this entire conflict. Idk the viewing didn't do much. That's... actually more words I managed to come up with for a movie I just said I totally forgot about, wow.

-- La chambre bleue, a new adaptation of a modern novel made by Mathieu Amalric (Bond villain from Boredom of Solace, if the reference helps; better yet, guy from The Diving Bell and the Butterfly). Pretty lean whodunit thriller, but again not much stuck in my head afterwards.

-- L'Etrangleur (The Strangler]), a 70s movie by Paul Vecchiali, this month's movie for me in which I did a piss poor job actually watching it. Some of it was interesting, with hints of Bresson-like repressed-acting-style, so I may do good by watching it a second time.

-- Love. Gaspar Noe's latest. It's shit. Actually, it's harmless shit, which kinda makes it worse. The acting is amateur forced nonsense and the sex is... well, abundant.

-- Bande de filles (also known as Girlhood, which abroad drew unnecessary parallels to Boyhood), another coming-of-age-under-ghetto-rules movie, but with stronger touches. Liked it.

-- Eden, pretty enjoyable drama based on the French touch & garage house trend in the 90s, therefore combined with lots of musical quotes and moments. Wait a minute, this director (Mia Hansen-Love) previously made a romantic movie I actually liked! (Goodbye First Love)

-- Hippocrate something something medical drama focusing on ethical issues and work tensions. Commendable, but hardly more interesting, on a technical and drammatic level, than any TV series episode.

-- J'ai pas sommeil, early movie by Claire Denis. Edgy, dark and sort of inaesthetic-like, but somehow it didn't move me, really.

-- La ceremonie by Claude Chabrol. Probably my favourite non-Godard (I'll get to those in a minute) movie from this bunch. Tense and borderline creepy thriller, with excellent performances from the lead actresses.

-- L'homme qu'on aimait trop (or In The Name of My Daughter) by Andre Techine. Something something drama thriller. Really generic.

-- Une place sur la terre (or A Place on Earth), about two unhappy souls connecting (although one of them is actually pushing for a connection more than the other). Unremarkable in style and some off-putting acting, which makes me downgrade it a bit to being irked by the whole melodrama.

-- Vivement dimanche, Truffaut's last film. Keeping it black & white, quirky & light on its feet and... quite Hitchcockian? The plot thickened a bit too much halfway through, but I still enjoyed Fanny Ardant's performance in particular.

-- And two Godards. Vivre sa vie, which I absolutely loved - cold, detached (brechtian) storytelling, drops of cinema verite, his usual cardboard cues and cuts, and yet a heartfelt and simple drama within this entire mix. Right now, probably my second favourite Godard movie, next to Week end. /// Also, Alphaville, which is even more Godardian in its mix of oddity, creative elements and visual cues, deadpan plot, (borderline bullsuit) philosophising etc, but which also left a good impression. Hell, it could actually rank quite high up the classic dystopian movies lists for me.
And somehow I managed even move movies, of the not-French type, in between the French type ones:
Spoiler: show

-- Il racconto dei racconti (Tale of Tales) a stupid and bloated fantasy squeeze-three-fairy-tales-into-one-flick movie from Matteo Garrone (who used to do a lot better in the past - Gomorra, Reality - but apparently lost it).

-- Valerie and Her Week of Wonders. Batshit 70s trippy stuff. (Old) Psychedelic (European) movies don't actually do very well in my book. I hated Sedmikrásky (Daisies), for instance.

-- What If, surprisingly borderline acceptable (read: not making me barf) quirk rom-com (starring Harry Potter in his eternal quest to de-Potter-ify himself and Zoe Kazan), although, yeah, not gonna work a second time.

-- 3 (or Drei or Three), by Tom Tykwer, surprisingly tucked between the fails that were The International and Cloud Atlas. Not bad, but very unbalanced between situational comedy and emotional drama.
by Ricochet
Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:30 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I wrote for an hour and a half about some new movies I watched, after which I clicked submit and suddenly I wasn't logged anymore WTF. So I'm going to go cry and sleep now. The movies were:

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl
The End of the Tour
Mississippi Grind
The Stanford Prison Experiment
Huo Hsiao-Hsien's The Assassin
by Ricochet
Tue Dec 15, 2015 7:26 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I've only seen Andrey Rublev, because I'm too much of a scaredy-cat to ready myself for serious Tarkovsky viewings. Then again, I might be overestimating the guy. Lem enthusiasts like to remind me from time to time that what he did to Solaris was a bit of a travesty. Rublev however was a 9/10 for me, the last fragment being one of the best things I've ever seen. What was its "fatal flaw" for you? - feel free to use spoilers.
by Ricochet
Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:46 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

This week in I Watched Movies:


I watched a few Japanese (mostly old) movies on my own, plus the awards season kicked in, so I watched some new movies with my folks as well. Spoilers: the new ones are shit compared to the old ones.

Mizoguchi Kenji's Ugetsu monogatari (I don't know if it has an English title). Loved this one. Mizoguchi apparently wanted it to be a post-war reflection or allegory on the oppressive nature of war, but I perceived it as a simpler he-who-desires-too-much fable. Well acted, no dragging tempi whatsoever, spellbinding classic and surreal elements.

Ozu's Tokyo Chorus, one of his 30s silent films, dealing with depression-time Tokyo at a more basic and intimate level. Again, the acting (traditional, restrained, presumably well-rehearsed under da man's indications) was a very pleasant surprise (making by comparison most of the expressionist German silent actors look high on drugs). Simple, pleasant viewing. My only gripe was probably the ceaseless, redundant upright piano music.

Imamura Shohei's The Ballad of Narayama, which won the Palme d'Or in 1983. Wow, this one is intriguing to say the least and might prove an acquired taste, without even pushing the envelope too much. It focuses on rural traditions, relationships or unwritten bonds between humans and nature, in such a fashion that tempts words like "naturalistic" and uncompromising - a boiling mix of coarse acting, eery human-nature interspersed imagery and dark folk vibes. Most of the movie is intense and sprawling, but then it leads to a final 30-minute-or-so mostly wordless marvel that one just has to watch for himself.

The Woman in the Dunes. Read the book some years ago, which, to my current surprise, made me envision everything in it in a much more claustrophobic and bleaker way than the adaptation chooses to (although it's no less gripping itself). Abe's novel is absolutely haunting and the movie should fairly achieve the same effect. The copy I have looks pretty rough and aged, so I can't fully appreciate the stylistical choices, but for instance it almost seems to experiment with near pitch black lighting and such; also noteworthy is Takemitsu's great composing. That being said, as far as I remember the novel's content, this looks like a pretty strict cinematic transposition of it (Abe wrote the screenplay too, so it hardly deviates or leaves anything significant out).

---- Intermission ----

Tarantino's The Hateful Eight. Wow, does this guy know how to crash and burn his own creations. To some extent, this started pretty well, even striving to rank as perhaps his least obnoxious and gaga pastiche of his recent ones (Basterds and Django), with manic dialogue and humor and what I would single out as a ballistic performance from Jennifer Jason Leigh (SLJ and Russell pretty much play out like in the trailer). Then the juvenile son of a gun inside QT takes over, leading to the worst kind of narrative solutions or quirks and messy, over-the-top resolutions which you've really seen a dozen times already from him. Any political underscore or visual greatness that this movie might boast can frankly go back up his butt, the way QT botches it, because I sure ain't giving no fucks.

Also on the subject of breathtakingly shot, blood-soaked epic movies with not much else underneath such layers, Inarritu's The Revenant. Now, he must have felt in the greatest shape after Birdman, yet I feel he should have mulled over a little longer on this one or maybe skip it altogether, because it's probably his first movie that reveals to me his limitations and grandeur air. He borrows Lubezki's staggering cinematography from Birdman, but also goes back to the basic, unrelenting bleakness of his earlier movies (such as Biutiful). He also emulates a lot of Herzog and Malick, but frankly he comes out looking like a fool out of it. Some sequences are downright incredible, no doubt (yes, the bear one is among those), still the flow of the movie is terribly choppy and episodic, to the point where I couldn't connect with any side of the story or focus on the whole experience anymore. Plus, if one would read the actual version of the events (or rather myth), there's even a chance of being disappointed by the changes Inarritu decided upon, because they're downright simplistic. DiCaprio's performance is incredibly physical and involved, but even with all this supreme effort (yes, I am acknowledging the what-must-a-Leo-do-to-get-an-Oscar meme), I still wouldn't call it the winning ticket of his career.

Finally, Bridge of Spies. By the book Spielbergian flick, to the point I can't even be bothered to say if it looks like another solid movie of his or one in which he can't step out of his element one bit. It really has all the clichees in it: epic length; noble heroic central figure; underlining morals (falling flat); crunchy imposing serious dialogue; exposition, foreshadowing, slowburn and/or juxtaposition of storylines.
by Ricochet
Wed Jan 06, 2016 2:28 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

My plowing through the Americans-like-to-give-Golden-Statuettes season continues:

Creed - True story, this is the only Rocky movie I have ever seen, if watching an "Everything Wrong with Rocky IV" YouTube video doesn't count. XD Just to mention, I wasn't impressed or anything with the director's debut Fruitvale Station or with Michael B. Jordan at that time or at any point until now. As for Creed, not much I can say, it's a fairly solid revival flick, but it does stick to its revival formula nonetheless. Stallone is doing quite a solid performance, by his standards and by the fact that, as I understand it, he wasn't allowed to pen his lines this time, and Jordan can confidently carry the torch from here on out. My only gripe was how much fast-forwarding this story had to make its way towards an entirely predictable, but also entirely implausible "final boss" act. I would also go even as far as to question whether it feels right to build a revival-reboot-sequel thingy highly based on a death in a movie like Rocky IV that, back then, was a total cheeseball solution to pumping more drama into the franchise.

Carol - mixed feelings that, to the movie's credit, made me think it over and over. It feels too much like a throwback to the likes of Far From Heaven and I'm not sure why this one is supposed to be heralded as a revelatory, bolder, more impactful movie; it's a better drama, perhaps, one that Haynes is the perfect director to enrichen with craftsmanship, period details, emotion and balance. But it's still run by his old tropes nonetheless. To my surprise, Rooney Mara outshines Cate Blanchett (pretty sure it'll be the other way around, come awards time). I also fear this was probably the worst screener, in terms of quality, I got my hands on, because all the grainy visual style in which this was developed translated into sheer blur. Could definitely rewatch in better conditions. So good, but unsure if not also a bit cosmeticised.

Love & Mercy - twofolded biopic of Brian Wilson's artistic life and mental condition, split between him creating and recording Pet Sounds and meeting his second wife, whilst under the "therapeutic" influence of Dr. Landy, in the 1980s. The first part is good, it portrays Wilson more or less like a tormented visionary and it makes me think there is something special to the album, even more than when I actually listen to it - which feels maybe slightly tricksy on the movie's behalf; as far as I read it on Wikipedia, the artistic feud with Mike Love is totally overblown for dramatic purposes. Dano is quite at his best, that I can remember, but as for the second part of the story, both Cusack and Giamatti are overdoing it, frankly. Probably a better awards movie with Hallmark-like qualities, in recent memory, nonetheless that kind of a movie overall.

On New Year's Eve, I tricked my parents into watching The End of the Tour (the David Foster Wallace movie), even thought it wasn't on their checklist - as for me, it was my third viewing and still like it a lot. HBO's "surprise" midnight movie was Interstellar, so I rewatched that as well, heh.

Room, by the same director who previously did the wacky, guilty-pleasure-tbh Frank. This time, it's the sort of thriller that, if one really doesn't know anything about the book or the subject, could/should watch this without any spoilers or hints. There's a good 20 minutes in this movie that are truly unnerving. As for the rest: well, the psychological ramifications are as finely shaped as I could interpret them, and the main performances are great (the child actor is actually terrific, outshining even Brie Larson). Is everything else about this movie just as important and valorous? Not sure. A better, more arthouse vision, overall, could have helped.

Anomalisa... actually, nevermind, you can't really raw-first-view comment on a Charlie Kaufman movie, so I'll just rewatch this sometime soon and then try to say anything about it

Brooklyn with "Ser-sha, just like i-ner-tia" Ronan. I will admit, for roughly three quarters of it I enjoyed this saccharine mashup of immigration tale - femalecentric - tale of two worlds - bildungsroman - love triangle more than I thought I ever would; the storyline had a traditional, but pleasant development, there was good humor and emotion, veridic interactions between the characters. But by God if the last 20 minutes didn't make the entire movie tumble and break its note - literally the most rushed resolution of cinematic and narrative tension and the cheesiest addendum possible. My dad couldn't stand it at all, he kept asking "what's this movie supposed to be about" over and over.

Finally, The Big Short, which is billed as a comedy drama, but for all the jokes it cracks, the fourth-wall breaking humor and showing the 2007-2008 financial crisis through a witty, sarcastic lens, it leads up to an expectedly sour, realistic conclusion. Even the character's own disillusionment translates over to you, as a viewer. Then again, I think it's a valid alternative to simply watching dramas with William Hurt cast as Paulson trying to save the day, or Jeremy Irons as fictional CEO of a flopping bank in Margin Call. The ensemble cast (Bale, Carell, Gosling) is fairly ok, without anyone showing off more than he needs too (Bale is even slightly underused, in fact). The parallel narative is a bit choppy, taking its time to bring all storylines closer in the same direction; the jargon in the writing can be a bit chewy, if you aren't too hooked on the movie, despite several meta, smartass attempts to simplify its understanding. The director's past credentials (movies with Ferrell and Carell) don't inspire much and this movie itself could fade away from memory days after viewing, but I guess it's alright.
by Ricochet
Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:51 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I'm bored and haven't written regular logs in two months, so might as well touch upon a few notable ones tonight.

The Lobster - oh wow I really, really liked this. It's not nearly as hardcore as Dogtooth (never saw Alps, a local reviewer found it so distasteful and derivative, I never felt compelled at that time), but it's not a step back for an English-language feature at all - unlike saaaaay Sorrentino's This Must Be All Over the Freaking Place or even Youth, even though I enjoyed the latter. The story structure and inner absurdity even have, I'd dare say, something kafka-esque to it and it hits with its social commentary fairly well. Some said the second half runs in circles thematically, but to me it was the flip side to a closed circuit. Not much room for a good resolution in a Lanthimos movie, anyway.

Victoria - high achievement with its single continuous take during almost two hours around Berlin, from clubs to apartments and hotel elevators rooms and back on the streets, but damn if the ad lib improv acting didn't get on my nerves real bad. Some say it's genuine, but I find it so unlikely for even the drunkest teenagers facing language barrier, with nothing but small talk, flirty exchanges and getting into a shitton of trouble at 5 in the morning in a big city to carry such clumsy conversations.

Taxi or Taxi Teheran or Jafar Panahi's Taxi. Seriously, why is Panahi such a genius? His classic films are legit 10/10 and dissident, critical statements of the highest, most genuine quality. And ever since he's been banned from filmmaking and leaving his country, he keeps coming back with inventive ways to bypass that or basically flipping the bird at the regime. Not sure if this counts as a spoiler, but this movie is likely mostly fictional (as in staged, rehearsed, prepared at least a fair bit), with just a few sequences that give the subtle impression of being unscripted or unexpected, which would normally take a bit away from the originality of this movie idea, but this being Panahi, it hits so well on everything it intends to actually address or express.

Mustang - French-Turkish movie about five orphaned sisters raised in a very conservative village by their next to kins (grandmother and uncle), gradually rebelling, each in their own way, against what life, customs and society requires of them. The clashes between the adults' narrowmindedness and the girls' wild spirit can get real overwhelming in some sequences. I don't think this movie is necessarily judgmental, but it's certainly partial and the ruling adults are sort of hardly fully fledged as characters. But other that that, this is really strong and emotional and well handled, especially for a debut film. Liked it.

Macbeth - oh god this was advertised as the darkest, most sanguine adaptation since Polanski's, but I fear that apart from the stylised looks, it felt like a real bore and chewy in its parlance.

45 Years - ideal enduring relationship story. No wait, it's actually a slow and meticulous U-turn on that. Abort, abort, abort! But seriously, this was incredibly conducted and gradually overwhelming chamber like piece. The most gut-wrenching moments happen to be wordless, in a movie full of polished, well timed and ultimately tense dialogue. The performances are absolutely splendid and Charlotte Rampling's one comes down to minimal, but intense gestures. It was a bit late come Oscars for me to comment in any relevant way on her nomination, but imo she blew away the competition in her category.
by Ricochet
Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:50 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

99 Homes - labelled as an underrated (come award season) Michael Shannon performance and companion piece to The Big Short on the subject of the '06-'08 estate crisis, with an antihero taking full advantage of people having their homes seized by the banks. Honestly, though, post-awards fatigue did nothing to make me interested in this fairly non-spectacular flick.

Krigen (A War) - Nominated for Best Foreign Language. I'm personally not a fan of having to watch a new bulk of war movies every year. This one was sort of good, complicated and messy in a sort of think-piece way (but also having its share of melodrama). Hurt Locker mixed with procedural drama, I guess?

Le tout nouveau testament - Belgian comedy / satire / something with ha-ha to it about God living in modern times and uhm having a family and uhm her daughter rebelling against Him and searching out for new apostoles. Confused already? Well, the good thing I can tell you is that, despite the very volative, extroverted type of comedy (I'd say typical of mainstream or TV French comedies which I normally can't stand), cuckoo fantasy telling and sometimes cheap CGI and stuff, it kinda has its moments.

Queen of the Desert - absolutely dull new movie by Herzog, biopic about Gertrude Bell, full of cheese and ham.

Ruined Heart, or Another Lovestory Between a Criminal and a Whore - erm. Well, I follow this local blogger, who usually takes pleasure in shitting on 90% of the movies that are hyped or relevant, but he recently posted a top 2015 full of quite alternative preferences and this was rather high up. Anyway, this can indeed be quite the bewildering experience, almost wordless acting (the actors are just filmed doing their scenes), but with so much music put into it, it could almost qualify as a musical. Or a tone poem. It's both psychedelic, chaotic, kaleidoscopic in sequences (to the point of non-linearity or nonsensical), sensual and sensorial. It definitely has stuff to appreciate, but I also felt that I'm losing interest halfway through.

World of Tomorrow oh oh god oh god oh god oh my god holy mother of god oh oh oh oh god. First of all, if you're not familiar with Don Hertzfeldt, go correct that. I've already viewed this five times, because it's so easy to find 15 minutes to rewatch it. And it frankly gets better and better with each viewing. At first I thought this isn't better than It's Such a Beautiful Day, but (whilst I still relate more to the other movie, because parts of it have me in stitches at every watch), upon thinking, some of the details in this one can win you over: it goes back to character interaction rather than omniscient narration, the four-year old girl in it is the most adorable thing about it (sort of like the small boy is the pivotal, enhancing performance in Room) and where most of the humor works at its best, the animation is varied and at times gorgeous, it seems to focus more on shaping up its fantasy than (at least judging by the ending) underlining too earnestly its message. Plus, it's Hertzfeldt still in top form. Funny, bittersweet, thoughtful. WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE
by Ricochet
Tue Apr 05, 2016 8:18 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 - This is (allegedly) a movie and I watched it on a lazy night.

A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Reflecting on Existence - It's well-nigh impossible to try to describe or recommend one of Roy Andersson's experimental movies, but here it is, the last of his "Living Trilogy" (I only saw this and Songs from the Second Floor and I think I like this one more). It's like a montage of incredibly dry, deadpan, syncopated absurdist narrative, a bit theatrical in a way too, like a fictional city in which the people are either marionettes or emotionally weightless. Nonetheless, if you can handle its high levels of detached and style-frozen arthouse, this can be a very interesting, absurd, comical and uncanny experience.

Ich seh, ich seh or Goodnight Mommy - Another recent horror getting praise for its tension, psychological "darc" and craftsmanship - co-made by Severin Fiala and the wife of Austrian filmmaker Ulrich Seidl, who is also renowned as not exactly sane in his membrane with his movies - and it's indeed quite stylish and growingly disturbing, but I either didn't watch it too passionately or it didn't truly grip me. Plus, if you happen to be a horror geek, you might see the twist being signaled with big letters way before any actual resolution act - I didn't, but then again I'm a total nub. :p

Illegitimate, a new 'Nauruan' film which I saw on a Sunday afternoon in a total wreck of a local cinema, with just five people and the projectionist being literally an old man who inserted a disc into the computer and screened it on a tiny projector device. God I hate my town.

Anyway, this movie intends to be a controversial piece mixing pro-choice/pro-life, incest and dysfunctional family dillemas in the same pot - the sort of stuff the highly acclaimed, Palme d'Or-laureate 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days once did, at least on the first abovementioned subject, but I'm afraid it's not a very good result at all. From what I understand, much of the movie has been conceived in an ad lib way - mostly amateur actors, improvised dialogues, low-budget and low-rate technical filmmaking decisions etc. - but it just adds to a clunky narrative and frustrating viewing, in which all the characters give you the "they-can't-be-this-daft, can-they?" impression all the time, and all the ideas the movie might try to debate are wasted away, due to lack of character development, intelligent conflicts and a baffling ending.

Hungry Hearts, an English-language movie directed by an Italian filmmaker, starring Alba Rohrwacher and Darth Emo Adam Driver, about a couple who fall in love (after the rather strangest goofy encounter ever filmed, I might add) and start a family, only for the mother/wife's restrictive vegan views to start affecting the child's health and send the relationships spiralling downwards. Good acting, even from our hipster friend, but the movie could get frustrating due to how quickly it loses any levity for intense psychological drama and due to incessantly oblique and narrow-minded the characters turn out trying to cope with the situation and communicate with each other. Plus the ending kinda blows it.

The Look of Silence, the counterpart documentary by Joshua Oppenheimer to The Act of Killing, about the '60s Indonesian Genocide. While the first one was told from the POV of the perpetrators, this one sort of deals with the common victims and survivors. In fact the main protagonist is the brother of a victim (who suffered a most gruesome execution) and is shown watching footage from The Act of Killing, in which the killers reenact or retell the stories, or even meeting up with some of the ex-vigilantes/murderers or their families. This can get very gripping, especially when said families only then find out about what their relative(s) have done. Heartwrenching stuff. Anyway, if The Act of Killing is downright bewildering and haunting, this one should be the part where you can actually empathise on a human level with someone - and I even tend to think it's the slightly better of the two.

Mountains May Depart by Jia Zhangke. A tryptic movie that boils down to a romantic love triangle story, meant to affect over time decisions, relationships and bonds between people. The last of the three parts switches to English and it's kind of clunky and derisive, but the first two parts are superlative and make me realise further that Chinese cinema might often hide some real gems. Not long ago, in 2014 I think, Black Coal, Thin Ice was kinda my MOTY.

Bitter Lake, another good documentary made by Adam Curtis for BBC, dealing with the bonds between Western and Middle East countries (particularly Saudi Arabia) throughout the 20th and 21st Century and the implications and repercussions. It naturally also covers the wars in Iraq or Afganistan, the uprising of terrorist groups such as Al-Queda or ISIL and the strenuous fight against them. For everyone waving "Team USA" charts, for instance, this might be a tough movie to sit through, because what it basically says is that, for the past 70 years, the modern states have collaborated or aided countries in the Middle East only for it to backfire time and again and create grave conflicts or for them to end up being used, plus that the same mistakes keep being repeated, such as in trying to fight terrorism but inadvertedly creating alliances with equally dubious or unlawful regimes, building the most simplistic "good vs evil" mentality in the ongoing war against terror or being incredulous in their attempts to "download" democracy in the Middle East and hoping it would stick.

So yeah, pretty much a "You dun goofd" moral to 70 years of diplomacy and war, particularly involving the US and the UK. If you're interested after reading this shoddy summary I attempted, go check it out. The documentary is kinda long to sit through and "trippy" in its visuals, music choices and montage (it often cuts real quick between polished and raw scenes), but I think it nevertheless presented its theme in a lucid manner.

Loin des Hommes or Far from Men, an adaptation of a story by Camus, set in Algeria, starring Viggo Mortensen with some admirable polyglot and composed acting skills, mixing existential drama with a bit of western, cultural and war touches. Well balanced, very humane, understated psychology, I quite liked this movie.
by Ricochet
Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:03 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've see

Pretty generic, tbqh, both in selection (which is not to say that some of these movies are not legit masterpieces - especially 300 - or at least influential/inspiring, if that's the main theme of the montage) and iconic scenery. I counted around 40-45 I've see, but it's only because he put so much predictable stuff in the last decade or so; otherwise, this list rather proves how lazy I still am in watching old cinema.

Plus, he phrased it as "100 years of cinema", but com'on, this is barely taking any peek outside the Hollywood windows. And no, some of the exceptions early on don't make up for it (although Roma, citta aperta is a small surprise).
by Ricochet
Fri Apr 22, 2016 4:17 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Ok, let's see, where did I last leave things off...

The Forbidden Room, a new project by versatile, eccentric and frankly bit cuckoo Canadian director Guy Maddin, that has the looks of countless old B-movies (silent or otherwise) mashed up together in a movie-within-a-movie-within-a-movie kaleidoscopic format. That's about as coherent as this can be described, for indeed there is no real coherence in this exercise, only visual and montage proficiency. Either arthouse candy or gristle, depending on your acquired taste blood levels, but I myself did find a few scenes memorable and I have them in my head even now, after half a month.

Deadpool - Neat... and that's about it. I didn't find the mix of setpieces that genre redefining. I'm a fan of meta and deadpan, but since I'm the suck at comic geekery, this is not quite my kind of meta and deadpan, either. I liked the small scope of this story, but it still felt like the story of who-cares.

Hail, Ceasar! - the new Coen Brothers movie, sort of a gentle ode to the Golden Age Hollywood times the way some of Barton Fink also was, with goofy shenanigans the way O Brother, Where Art Thou? was (and yes, Clooney is indeed the direct characterial link here). Felt really undercooked and like losing its steam halfway through. Ensemble cast was too big and scrambled. Attention to detail and dialogue is always there, in a Coens movie, but it doesn't make the whole experience complete. If the focus is on the comedy side of it, then I think it comes off even worse. Anyway, I didn't truly hate it or anything, I was moreover indifferent, it's very familiar stuff under their signature and feels like a really minor movie.

The Falling - British drama (starring "Arya Stark" bravely embracing arthouse acting) that was raved by a few critics that I follow, such as Kermode, enough to warrant a watch, yet I was mildly vexed by it, to be honest. Seemed to combine psychedelic, coming-of-age, period drama, in a mysterious but unfulfilling fashion. One thing that really bothered me was that the "mysterious affliction" part evolved into a 30-minute stretch or so of happenings that had absolutely no variation. By the end of it, I was rather rolling my eyes at every reoccurence, rather than trying to understand what keeps happening. Anyway, I think there was visual and directorial panache to this movie that was simply misshapen

Catch Me Daddy - on another spectrum of British contemporary cinema, gloomy drama/thrillers with a socio-cultural touch to it, set in obscure low-class remote parts of the island. The kind similar to Fish Tank or The Selfish Giant or Mike Leigh/Ken Loach old movies. In this one, a Pakistani girl in hiding with her Scottish bf is chased around by her family, to serious consequences. Here, the visual panache enhances the atmosphere and the chills of the action. Plus, if a goofy dance sequence with Patti Smith's Horses blasting manages to make me go into serious headbanging (...although mostly because of Patti Smith), that's quite the achievement.

After the Wedding - sheer coincidence, but I planned to see this (and did so) on Mongoose's birthday, which is funny, because her and I don't feel the same about Susanne Bier's achievements and this is the movie she's pitched me countless times to make me reconsider. And well... this sort of both works better, out of all her films, and displays the issues I usually have with them. It was interesting to see a younger Mads Mikkelsen with slightly different acting chops than the mannerisms we're used to nowadays (Hannibal, The Hunt and others). Some of the drama was real good, especially early on, but then it kept reaching for more plot development to fill up the other acts and the focus shifted so wildly from one character to another.

Son of Saul - finally saw this at a special screening at the Philharmonic. ok wow, big one and lot of feelings around it. So this is the Oscar-, Globes- and Cannes-laureate Holocast movie, focusing entirely and also literally on a Sonderkommando member, tasked to burn the dead, who then becomes rather possessed by the idea of trying to give a deceased boy a proper Jewish burial and facing the challenges to achieve that. There's also an aspect that he might take the boy to be his (illegitimate?) son - hence the title - but to me it was never made clear if that's pretextual, realistic or symbolic. His attempt would be easier to interpret, though: redemptive act, religious burden, symbol of hope, etc. Anyway, the host said before the screening "I won't wish you to enjoy the viewing, because that seems unlikely...", which sounded a bit corny, still... this being Auschwitz '44, it is an understandably hard sit and an uncompromising, brutal, grim depiction. I didn't feel truly wowed by the technical aspects, although I acknowledge that they are vital and masterful (academic ratio, camera always locked on the protagonist, so that everything else in the fore- or background is merely fragmentary, blurry or suggestive, etc.). The level of immersion also slightly dropped for me, once the storyline contained a lot of providential things falling into place for the protagonist during his quest and also how "well-connected" he seemed to be with different factions inside the concentration camp. Then again, and without wanting to spoil much [hence incoming spoiler tags], by the time the movie ended, I still felt suddenly overwhelmed and gasping for air and even emotional self-control,
Spoiler: show
not because of the predictability of the outcome, but because of the sisyphic absurdity of it all.
Recommended, even relevant, but not without some mixed feelings about its virtues.

Moj rower (My Father's Bike) - I fell asleep to this... both times I tried to watch it. Yeah, it's that sort of sappy family drama. How did I even get to watch this?

Sunset Song - adaptation by Terrence Davies of a Scottish novel about the coming-of-age of a farmer's daughter at the turn of century, right about when the First World War kicks in. Very aesthetic, slowly brewed, picturesque directing and narrative, with a lot of understated language, tension, emotions. Less sure what it amounts to, though. Sure, it's a fine period melodrama and it can almost go as the Brooklyn version that's less filled with clichés and with ambitious arches, but at times it also felt strained. The ending also spiked and spiralled, compared to the rest of the movie's tone.

Winter Light - second viewing, still couldn't feel the grace of our lord Bergman descending upon me and I still missed a ton of subtext, like an idiot. This time, I followed more of the second half - the first time I watched, past a certain important scene, it felt strangely filler-esque - but again, I had done a shit job of watching this back then and this time was a mere mild improvement.
by Ricochet
Fri Apr 22, 2016 6:21 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

<review

ok

Well you said it yourself. "At parts".
by Ricochet
Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:28 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

This week in Remember Movies?
The past week was the first in a very long time in which I managed to resume my movie watching habits, so I thought I'd resume writing a bit about them as well.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

The Neon Demon, the new movie from Nicolas Winding Refn, the bonker chic filmmaker of Valhalla Rising, Drive and Only God Forgives, this one going along with the trend of the latter two and fitting in nicely - and in the middle, quality-wise, I'd say: theatrical minimalism and emotion-unclad portraits, visual aesthetics cranked up, jabbing moments of visceral violence or horror fantasia, shock value or sensorial bewitchery. As a counterpiece to the more masculine previous movies, this delves into the theme of the devilish female fashion industry, with both characterisations and symbolism about on the nose as it can get. As for the final act, whether it's a culmination of every theme and symbol Refn has been trying to shape or something gone totally wheels up, it's up to everyone to decide, but it's entirely in Refn's nature. Dunno what more to add; at the end of this list, I'd almost feel surprised to consider this the best of all these movies this week. It has a couple of great set pieces, it's overall good and trippy, but also not something worth throwing superlatives at or, on the contrary, get worked up about.

Gett: The Trial of Viviane Amsalem, an Israeli(-French) movie (part of a whole trilogy that I myself did not check, although I sense the movie works more than fine on its own) about a women trying to obtain official separation from the husband, with almost nothing but her own unhappiness fueling this desire, and the long-term tribulation she has to face in order to achieve that. More of a "bottle" film in which the story, the characters and their interactions are the high points. It easily taps into generating empathy for the main character's uphill battle, fueling the melodrama or subtilizing human conflict, marriage customs, prejudices, religious law issues. I think this is a tasteful, strongly scripted chamber drama.

Julieta, the new Pedro Almodovar movie, adapting a tryptich of short stories by Alice Munro into, arguably, a more cohesive story, though still marked by timeline jumps. Centering it on feminine portrayal (a quality throwback all the way to his Volver, in that regard), lush visuals (always a constant), a far diminished incentive to veer into darkly humoristic twists and trickery (a la The Skin I Live In) and restraint, elegant drama (probably in stark contrast with the total charade that he intended I'm So Excited to be), this almost feels like a return to form and a seriously crafted work... yet I didn't felt too compelled by it. Despite what a piquant, refined experience and immersive, well-performed story it can be, it still ends up feeling somewhat minor.

Cafe Society, the 100-millionth Woody Allen new movie released in quick succession, that might earn a better grade in the eternal "is it a dud or actually good" reviewing game of his recent filmography, without it really amounting to anything. It's as cozy of a period piece and quirky moral tale as he makes 'em (movie makers! stars! gangsters! complicated love triangles! aspiring youthful lad who's the spitting alter-ego of Allen!). But for all the talk about how visually polished this one is and how the performances (mostly) hold, it's really nothing to survive after a viewing. Heck, it might even be a tad too sterile, even for Woody's standards.

The Sea of Trees, the much scorned new Gus van Sant, who apparently has fully lost himself into the genre of dramatic cheeseball. Frankly, it's not in the so bad it's inconceivable category, as much as it is so dull and poorly made, it's hardly worth trying to find the words as to why it's such a misfire.

Swamp Water, a 1941 film by Jean Renoir. Entertaining.

Love & Friendship, a new Jane Austen adaptation (though the title is misleading, since the short novel Lady Susan is the adapted material) by Whit Stillman of 90s fame (but whose previous, mumblecore-ish Damsels in Distress I couldn't care less about). Not sure if the source happens to be a comedy of manners, but this is what this film aims for. And it happens to be a very pleasant watch at that, besides the light, savory period setting and vocabulary and the subtle, mannered performances (nothing too tremendous from lead Kate Beckinsale, I should say, still well done). I chuckled or even laughed out loud at some of the situations or even characters altogether.

Horse Money, latest from Portuguese Pedro Costa, a really stern and impenetrable project, with perhaps both minimalist theatrical and docufiction elements, in which the heavily discursive, stream-of-consciousness-like lines from old characters are meant to contain reflections of the past, musings and grievings altogether. It's certainly arthouse candy, alas I tried and failed, to the point of lulling.

Self-Portrait of a Dutiful Daughter, a Romanian indie flick about a young woman stuck in existential limbo, finishing up her degree, getting to live in her own apartment although not entirely independent from her parents, having an affair with a married man and having either pompous discussions or casual hangouts with the few friends she has, and whose main issue that actually seems to trouble her in all of this is that she'd like to get a dog, but it's too expensive and papa isn't willing to help her out with some money, either. Uhm yeah. This is just the sophomore movie from this young female filmmaker, with at least some interesting elements of autobiographical projection - the cast happens to be a mix of pro and amateurs, with the protagonist's parents being the filmmaker's own. The movie is representative of our New Wave heavy realism - the filmmaker being in fact a protege of New Wave titan Cristi Puiu - and it shows both the deep style and annoying limitations of the genre. Critic fans of the New Wave that I read are calling this, at least in its form, impeccable, but honestly, it's a "nothing-happens" kind of movie, most of the dialogue is cringe and most of the characters are as interesting as a pineapple, and besides, I also didn't feel good about watching myself in the mirror, a few years from now on. Except that I'm not a woman. And I'd like to have a cat.
by Ricochet
Fri Oct 07, 2016 2:59 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

El Club - Chilean director Pablo Larrain is likely set to be Oscar contender this year with the biopic Jackie and four years ago he made No, a delectable, impassionate media-political drama that also got Oscar nomination, but this movie here proves he doesn't shy away from edgier subjects, shot in an impervious style, either. Story revolves around a group of disgraced Catholic priests living in seclusion until a newly joined member is tagged along by a victim of his dark past and an incident makes the whole group come under the scrutiny of the clerical administration. An interesting aspect of this movie, perhaps, is that, for the most part, the themes of remorse, redemption and such are not even close to applicable. The movie has a minimalist, obscure start, after which things go sideways and it's chilling all the way through. One thing I was struck by was how much of the dialogue unsettled me, down to the (well-acted) monotone and insensitive voices and dictions of some of the characters. The cinematography is as chilling and bleak in colours as the mood and lives that are to be beheld. With the Vatican abuses still a hot topic these past years, it's inevitable to see this movie as a strong invective and a judgemental piece - oddly enough, I thought of Spotlight as a companion piece - but I think it manages to be a resolute dissent, with dramatic purposes of raising questions and challenging the viewers' empathy or revulsion, rather than be a merely sensationalist, disagreeable ride.

Fuocoammare (Fire at Sea) - a documentary centered on the migrant crossings and crisis happening on the island of Lampedusa, in Italy, intertwined with scenes from the lives and day-to-day activities of the locals, both old and new - although the movie does switch from one story to another in such a way, that it's either a thematic implication of how most Europeans are both aware and passive in light of the situation, or a rather concerning disconnect. The colour of my rating reflects that it's not quite perfect at making this clear. Nevertheless, just like Dheepan having won the Palme d'Or (2014), this winning the Golden Bear last year might look a little on the nose as far as political-fueled awards go, but it evades the perception of being just an art project fishing for accolades at the right time and can stand out as a relevant movie, engrossing and small in details and reflections.

Metropolis - Fritz Lang's epic 1927 silent film, which I had on hold for a long time, but finally indulged in watching during my birthday. To my understanding, this is the restoration of the sole original (but damaged) copy found in Argentina(?). As always, not the best genre for me to pass on judgement, but am I ready instead to join the chorus praising this as an all-time classic? Well, the visuals and set-designs are all grandiose and A++. As expected from German expressionism, the acting (body language, facial expression) is very striking, overt, extravagant and at times even silly - culminating with the machine-woman's multitude of loose gesture, squints, crazed looks and so on. The lenghts of the scenes are Wagnerian-like - I laughed out loud when, 40 minutes into it, an intertitle signaled "the end of the Prelude" - with certain stretches that could count as redundant, including in the music, which at one point drummed hard on a dissonant version of La Marseillaise. Still, no doubt a spectacle of a classic movie.

---And from here on I found myself alone at home for a week and dropped the cinephilic standards by watching several movies airing on TV (HBO, Cinemax, this kind of stuff mostly), some of them with real interest, others just to have time pass by---

Mistress America, a 2015 Noah Baumbach movie that could count as a follow-up to his Frances Ha, especially given the reappearance of his muse Greta Gerwig in it, but with less creative fuel in the same stylistic tank, although not stagnant either, as I'll point out further along. The angsty, adrift young female protagonist figure, trying to find her voice and connect with people, is played this time by Lola Kirke (in a quite adorable way, truth be told), while Gerwig's character is a more accomplished, versatile, prolific (while also narcissistic, troubled and at times...well, full of s**t) person that becomes the former's model and sucks the young woman into her orbit. To some degree of an element of surprise, much of the second half of the movie steps away from the New York mumblecore cornucopia to a more chamber-like act filled with comedy of manners and screwball moments.

Star Trek Beyond - I don't think I'll need to spoiler this, as I'm not enough of a fan to get into detail or ranting (did watch a lot of TNG back in the days, though). I thought it was enjoyable. It does look indeed televisual - in the sense of a "quest/adventure/challenge of the week" that doesn't translate too well for our modern, multiplex-manipulated perception of how heavy in meaning a SF standalone movie should be (its thinness is basically amplified by the Lin-esque heavy action set pieces) - but I rather prefer this to either of the mind- and space-time-bending from ST or the dark-brooding confrontations (and meta gross rip-off-isms) from Into Darkness. Some secondary characters do get a bit too many lines, I sensed; by the second half my interest was halved, I'd say; and the villain with his backstory and twist didn't pay off too much. But I've got no beef with it, otherwise, for it was exactly the type of popcorn movie I had planned for the evening. It not taking itself (or its reboot mythology) too serious and keeping the story and challenge straight to the chase is definitely a better road.

Kalifornia - 90s thriller, highlighting Brad Pitt in his talented, daring youth (not that he's not still a very inspired actor at times) and, oh wow, Admiral Helena Cain. Unfortunately, both Pitt and Juliette Lewis chew a bit too much into their off-center characters, plus I never noticed this much before how dull David Duchovny comes off in movies, as opposed to TV series (although I hardly payed attention to Californication, past a few episodes of "oh look, douche guy being douche"). There are both some noir and road movie sensibilities in this one, but frankly, not that great of a watch.

Zipper - House of Cards meets... uhm, Shame? Patrick Wilson with a sex addiction. Nekid women. Stupid mistakes and "oh no my life is falling apart" moments. Blah.

13 Hours - The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi Apparently a more serious attempt at drama and action from Michael Bay (yes a Bay movie was on TV and I didn't switch to something else fml!), but I think the penchant he has for certain things still betrays him. A hack like myself would be able to tell. The script is dogballs, nothing but bro-style dialogue or shouting during action scenes. There's even that sideline guy prototype Bay tends to insert in all his movies, whose role is to be mildly irate and say quippy, over-the-top lines. Plus, I counted like three climaxes, each one looking and playing out the same. If there's one thing, the action doesn't shy away from violence and gory details - but even here, there's such a blockbuster/popcorn quality to it, instead of any authentic real combat misery.

5 to 7 (with no connection to Agnes Varda's "Cléo from 5 to 7", which for a sec I thought it would be :confused: ) A heavily syruped romantic story between an aspiring writer (RIP Anton Yelchin) going into a coup de foudre driven affair with an older, married French woman, who fully embraces however the style of her open marriage, to the point in which her husband does it as well and not even their kids find it odd or controversial. The sole conflict resides in how enamoured the protagonist becomes and what desires (read: wishful thinking) arise from this. There's elegance to how this romance plays out, although it's also very artificial and heavily scripted, making it all less plausible. Unfortunately the last act drives into total cheese, including music cues that made me want to slice my ears off. Speaking of which, the movie is so pompous, it gets to have Alan Gilbert, music director of the New York Philharmonic, in a cameo.

Sleeping Giant, a 2015 Canadian film, which I'm actually surprised of it not being a Scandinavian one, because it certainly looks made out of that fabric: beautiful wildlife scenery, the impression of a community in which everyone is running smoothly and relaxed, the coming of age of a group of kids marked by competing with each other, trash talking, stealing beer and trying pot or falling in love with girls, until introversion, deeper issues and immaturity start creating ripples and lead to more serious consequences. The title alone made me think of the British movie The Selfish Giant by Clio Barnard (which I absolutely love) and they do turn out to share sort of the same moral tale, except the Brits tend to add poverty and broken home to highlight what influences the kids' lives, whereas here it's just the dark undertones in the relationships surrounding family or close friendships. It was a good watch, but it also had its predictable set pieces.

Recordações da Casa Amarela (Recollections of the Yellow House), a 1989 movie by João César Monteiro that I didn't manage to watch as part of my Portugal trip playlist back in August and which I'd describe at first viewing as "The Life of Vompatti at 60". No joke.

Paul Thomas Anderson's Inherent Vice was also on one night and, by god, did it feel a whole lot better on second viewing (I'd describe the first to have been a disaster and a bore). Sure, a lot of it still feels hazy, but much of the humor and the logic of the narrative flow suddenly clicked this time. And I still don't know what makes Joaquin Phoenix tick, but god bless him.
by Ricochet
Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:15 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

So the past two weeks of my movie watching activities could have been almost described as lax, touching upon a few auteur movies before wanting to descend into popcorn/weaksauce zone for a change, if not for the past two evenings (or rather nights) in which a nocturnal marathon screening of Cannes movies organized in my hometown sent me into cinephilic overdrive. With the exception of two new movies I watched (the most irrelevant ones, too), the Cannes thread will prove common to both the ones I went to see at the screenings and the ones I involuntarily picked to watch in the comfort zone of my kino lair.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Le dernier des injustes (The Last of the Unjust) [Cannes-screened 2013], a documentary by Claude Lanzmann, of Shoah fame, about Benjamin Murmelstein, the last surviving Elder of the Jewish Council in the Theresienstadt concentration camp, thus a partial focus on the life and activities in that ghetto, from its formation in 1941 till its liberation towards the end of the World War II (when the Nazis nevertheless attempted mass liquidation of the camp via deportation). Murmelstein served as the third and last of the Elders, after his predecessors were executed, his pragmatic if unpopular actions leading to his ill repute of a perceived collaborator. The documentary is split between the footage of Lanzmann interviewing Murmelstein in 1975 and Lanzmann himself, much later, well into his 80s, revisiting places from the camp whilst quoting from Murmelstein's memoir and musing himself at the horrors of the events. The documentary is technically very long - over three hours and a half - which is perhaps not surprising from the creator of the 10-hour Shoah, but the feel is that it all flows much quicker, because the discussions go on at length on various subjects and the montage is thus sparser. Back in 1975, Lanzmann is shown prodding Murmelstein at times for answers or certain details, but the final form of this documentary inspires the approach of (re)evaluating Murmelstein's actions as tough but necessary and the man as more of a heroic figure. To any uninformed viewer, the stories about the Theresienstadt camp should prove shocking and moving. Of course, one only needs to check the links on the film's English wikipedia page to also find articles that raise issues with Lanzmann's one-sided investigation and occasionally self-indulgent research.

The Handmaiden (Agassi) [Cannes-competing 2016], bit hard to describe this one, but since it's a Park Chan-wook (Oldboy, Vengeance trilogy), one can luckily get away with such excuse. One thing the movie does is subvert every expectation (but again, Park Chan-wook here, duh) and ramp it up at every switch, as well: at first it seems a period drama, then wham, it turns out it's a confidence trick thriller; then a subtle romance going on kinky; then halfway through it decides to basically rewind the story and fill in the gaps from a different perspective, the reveals in this process being about as fucked up as it can get; then Chan-wook realizes the violence jar has not been even remotely filled up, so yeah, let's take care of that as well. I notice the American press, in particular, is head over heels for this movie's lush aesthetic and actual romanticism. Regarding the former, now that I find myself halfway into having checked this year's Cannes slot, I could definitely describe its style and craziness as memorable. But at the same time, if, say, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance was a movie that actually moved me and Oldboy one I accepted for its cult swag (and... yeah, my Chan-wook checklist stops there), this one was tad too silly for my own immersion to prove an accomplished one.

The Price of Desire, a pretty cheesy and lazy-ass biopic I caught on TV, about famed female architect Eileen Gray, her relationship with Jean Badovici and her collaboration with Le Corbusier (complete with unrequited sentiments from the latter, although I found no such details in his actual bio) in designing the modernist E-1027 house. The acting from the first two proves fairly limited and pedantic, while the third gave me the impression he would not do a half bad Truman Capote impression, especially with the fourth wall break ramblings he's been invested with in this one.

Suicide Squad - Completely laughable. Compared to the BvS debacle, this one truly looks like a train wreck and hopefully the rock bottom of DC's misguided capeshit making. I refuse to believe this is the product of a filmmaker who at least pointed at some directorial signature with End of Watch or Fury, a few years ago (although his penchant for movies involving task force action sort of explain the SWAT-iness of the action set pieces in here as well). If this is the result of the reshoots that were decided by management, after Deadpool made them piss their pants, it shows how botched the whole thing is. The ensemble comic cast is a complete caricature. The characters' abilities were pretty much exhausted from fight level 1-1, which made the other five levels up to the boss fight repetitive and uninteresting. I cannot even praise Margot Robbie, despite the work she puts into capturing Harley Quinn, simply because she is given lines after lines of quip. The only one you could be invested in would be Will Smith, but that would basically make it a Will-Smith-is-decent-hero movie. Is there someone else I'm forgetting...? Well, thing is, I'm hardly upset about that part, it had disaster written all over it. The movie probably did as well, although what this one settles for good is that trailer/promo coolness is now completely separate from actual movie expectations, since they do require more brains and less franchise gluttony to work out at all.

Would also mention rewatching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, after A Person rustled my Jimmies in the Chatzy by dissing it without even having watched it properly. I won't get into much details, but this is one hella stylish spy thriller. Granted, it's rather no fat compared to Le Carre's book (I'm just finishing up the Karla trilogy these days), perhaps with a lot less verbal dueling than the book can charm you with, but its tension and detective set pieces are well-tailored, otherwise. Excellent Gary Oldman performance, the less is more type.

====

And now let me tell you about how I spent the past Friday and Saturday nights at my local Philharmonic hall, watching three movies from the Cannes '16 each day (err night) at ungodly late hours. The organizers' conception was baffling, in that they thought it was ok to start session each day (err night) at 10 or 11pm, screen three (3!) movies and basically run the whole thing into the night. A fortunate aspect was to make it all free, so that people actually showed up, at least for the first movie - trust me, the difference between a special screening that's free and one that would cost as little as the equivalent of two dollars fifty is yuge in this town. Yesterday (Sunday) morning I found myself wobbling back home at 6am, because it all started at 11pm, the first movie was three (3!) hours long and the last one started at 4am. I did the math and that was 20 minutes shy of watching Satantango in one sitting (spoilers: it's a 7-hour 15-minute long movie).

Anyway, here are the movies:

Night 1

Albüm [Cannes-awarded, separate section, 2016], a feature film debut from Mehmet Can Mertoglu, who graced us with his presence for Q&A, which proved a bit more illuminating than the movie's own clarity at first watch. Essentially a movie about how much of a taboo and a source for social anxiety the issue of adopting is in Turkey, although it opts to depict in a both humorous and revolting way the movie's main couple's concern with their own image rather than their parenthood. Again, without the director explaining afterwards that his message is borderline realistic, I would have taken it to be a more absurd, dystopian depiction, with several scenes making me feel I'm watching one of Roy Andersson's cuckoo movies. This movie was also shot and co-produced by several Romanian artists, which at times gave me the vibe that several minimalist or slow-paced scenes are referential in that regard (a la "watching people eat soup for minutes", which is a running gag about most of the heavy New Wave Romanian movies). Anyway, fairly good stuff, I'd almost inclined to bump the color of this rating, if not for the feeling that certain stylistic choice and narrative elaborations from this director could ripen with his next endeavors.

Nicolas Winding Refn's The Neon Demon [Cannes-competing 2016], which was the only movie from this selection that I had seen already. Reviewed it here already: silly and unsubtle, but aesthetic candy and most pleasant of his since Drive. One thing I felt at second viewing is that the third act is quite slow to get through - or was it merely my 1am urge to get to the next one?

I, Daniel Blake [Cannes - Palme d'Or, 2016] Most critics have struggled to greet the news of this taking away the big prize as anything but a bit of an upset and to define what exactly makes it so "Palme d'Or-able" (except for Mark Kermode, who apparently loves any sentimental character-driven movie that makes him tear up), and I don't really have any positive answer either. There's almost a whiff of a topical award-giving to it (just like Dheepan won Palme d'Or or Fuocoammare won the Golden Bear in 2015, both about migrants' issues), with austerity still problematic in most countries, including the UK. But Ken Loach's movie is the kind of drama with some degree of political charge that he's done before, plus the kind of drama which, split into bits, you could feel you've seen it in other movies before, as well: an old protagonist recovering from serious medical issues, but then finding himself stuck in a bureaucratic maze with no solution with the institution that assesses his eligibility for sickness benefit (yeah, I'm copying a bit from wiki here) - and all this proves to be truly Kafka slash Catch-22 nasty stuff - while also bonding with a young mother of two, facing the same support issues, plus relocation, work and financial hardships. That it was the sort of Cannes year in which the jury decided to go with the unsophisticated movie that spoke more to the heart is perfectly fine - and Loach's movie is no doubt good, with impressive character acting (to the point of identifying real humans) and, at best, making you rage at every scene of social injustice. But it doesn't quite steal the show, either.

Night 2

Toni Erdmann [Cannes-competing 2016] The German comedy by Maren Ade that earned rave responses from everyone... except, apparently, for the nine people that were in the jury and gave it nada. Now, the stone-hearted me probably also desired more meaningfulness and formal shininess from a drama about a father trying to get back in touch with his daughter and cheer her up from the stress, alienation and depression of her business work abroad, but that's really what this movie is at its core, while developed meticulously and ramping up the father's appeal to practical jokes and incorrigible silliness. Most of the times, the humor is so minutely timed and gestural, then the last hour turns up the hilarity to eleven.

Just la fin du monde (It's Only the End of the World) [Cannes - Grand Prix 2016] New drama by Canadian enfant terrible Xavier Dolan, derided as always by critics if not even more than usual. Adapted from a French stage play by Lagarce, Dolan seems to only exacerbate its theatrical qualities and stark tone to suit his own filmmaking moods quite to perfection: chamber piece, tight interior shots, close ups galore, logorrheic dialogue mixed with anxious silence or navel-gazing musical interludes, plus the gamut of emotions. But boy, does it all feel vexing and shallow. Compared to this, I almost want to go back and declare his 2014 Mommy a hyper-emotional, balls to the walls masterwork. The levels of hysteria in this movie aren't as severe as critics made me fear (although kudos to anyone going through how much Vincent Cassel can simply lose his shit without grimacing), but it's nigh impossible to relate to the dysfunctionality of the family depicted as a whole or even the members you could relate to in theory (the protagonist's inability to react to his relatives' tantrums or open up did not make him any less infuriating to me). Overall, this felt like a bit of an aesthetically rich served dish of drama bull.

The Salesman [Cannes - Best Actor and Screenplay 2016] Probably too serious of a movie at the end of such a marathon, and for its 4am startup time that night, but if there's a filmmaker who cannot be swayed from building highly poignant family vignettes with wonderful visual balance and moving dramatical stories or conflicts, it's probably Iranian Asghar Farhadi. At least after his A Separation, which is superb, and The Past, which was also good but kinda lost me towards the end, this feels like grasping at and weaving a simpler subject - a married couple's struggles after they move into a new home and the wife is attacked by an old visitor of the previous, apparently promiscuous female tenant. The movie also revolves around the couple performing in an adaptation of Miller's Death to a Salesman, although the parallels with their drama and the movie title are less clear. It seems I finally dozed off during what some critics described as a suffocating climax. Oh well.
by Ricochet
Tue Oct 25, 2016 6:10 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Addendum:

Elle, a new film by Paul Verhoeven (his first in six years, if we discard some 2012 project he made), with both elements that one could find to be unexpected (like a level of artisty and stylishness that could hardly rhyme with his pulpy, messy banger filmmaking days of RoboCop, Basic Instinct or Total Recall, decades ago) or that resurface as his trademarks (like... the pulpiness and the messiness). To describe any bit what this movie tries to go for, as far as premise or story would be concerned, would feel spoilery in itself, so I'll just note that Isabelle Huppert gets to play with outstanding panache a total bitch of a woman, and yet one you could still follow around for two whole hours. Her delivery of deadpan dark humor is a true delight at times, at least for someone like me. The other characters around her aren't quite as full-fledged, but each are revealed deeply flawed in their own way, whether they're wearing it on their sleeves or hiding it behind a facade. So a lot of Verhoeven's flavors (the vibe of a wicked thriller ride, femme fatale-ism, messy violence) shine through and, while I wouldn't say there is something deeper than that (unless it's emphasing the "French are fken weirdos" theme), it still proved an exciting, provocative, twisted pleasure.
by Ricochet
Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:13 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A new round up from me, although it's been a lazy/buzy last two week. No two-day seven-hour moviefest surprises this time.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Don't Breathe which is, I suppose, the hit horror movie of this year in the "smart horror" subgenre, but I wouldn't call it too accomplished or exciting. Basic story is three punks who raid and rob houses want to score a big, seemingly easy hit against a blind old lonely man, except it turns out he's a badass war veteran and joke's on them, as the rest turns into a tight space survival thriller/horror adventure. This is made by the director of the Evil Dead remake, which, depending on each person's investment in the original franchise (mine is zero i.e. zero movies seen), will make you reject or accept him as a serious wielder of the arts. There are a few tense scenes and effort into some neat technical designs, but the movie downgrades halfway into sleaze and silliness - and not really the silly kind that nevertheless kept a movie like It Follows savourable all the way through; nope, it's wheels-off-logic complete silliness. A few additional sins would be the frame spook / jump scare-ititis and (mild spoilers, perhaps) the adversary having legit nine lives.

Zootopia - formulaic as fark, but fun altogether, nicely build-up world and yes... racism, discrimination... themes, big themes, big themey themes. And I liked the fox. I like foxes. But yeah, really not colouring outside the lines much either, for a regular Pixar movie. What's that? It's a Disney movie? What's the dif-

Captain Fantastic, in which Viggo Mortensen raises a family of six on his own, into the wilderness, in a way that the kids can grow to be both self-governing and highly educated (which will serve throughout the movie as fuel for ironic gags and preachy display, respectively); all with a hint of hipsterism and marxism, as well. Things change when the kids' long-time estranged mother dies and they all have to head back into society to attend the funeral. I did not enjoy this one much at all, it sort of wants to be both a profound drama and indiesquely over the top. It also goes full cringe into the very last 15 minutes or so.

Kwaidan, an old movie by Masaki Kobayashi, which created a nice coincidence in having watched a spooky ghost-story (without realizing /movie-fact-checking-fail) movie on Halloween (which I don't care about celebrating). A beautifully crafted anthology of four segments, which are basically adaptations of folk tales or strange stories. It reminded me right away of the similarly episodic nature of Kurosawa's Dreams, which is one of my absolute sentimental favourites. Two of the stories/film parts build up very slowly and then culminate very effectively into some spooky, freaky twist, while the third is a masterful looking version of a particularly famous or popular tale / play; perhaps only the fourth felt a bit too much and uninteresting, at the end of an already long watch (three hours in total).

L'ombre des femmes (In the Shadow of Woman) by Philippe Garrell, a director with an extensive filmography over the past five decades, but whose movies I seem to have started watching backwards, or rather in real time as he keeps making new ones (2013's Jealousie and now this). There's something very "brève" to them - under the 80-minute mark, shot in b&w, simple scripted and with old movie sensibilities, a la combining Eric Rohmer's "moral tales" (but without that much philosophising and talking) and Woody Allen's spur-of-the-moment, everyman dramas (but without that much quirkiness and... talking), wrapping up at the first sign of a satisfactory conclusion. There's love and cheating and bohemia and conflicting emotions in this one, but it's also really hard to define what such a movie aims for, except for an intrigue subject that might prove interesting for a bit.

Mister Doctor House and the Cloak of Inception, hot take after seeing it today in theaters; bit of a letdown, because I would have liked a really solid, maybe more original too, MCU movie and I can only write it down as passable, and also would have liked a breather from the main bulk of the Marvel mince machine, and yet it's just an origin story set to be fully integrated into the future salad supreme. There are elements (mostly visual) that elevate it past the by-the-recipe Marvelian movie-making (which is a dire concept to think about, considering the comfort of the success they're having with it, each time), but not really all that much, once you scratch the surface. There are also good intentions in both trying to create a more solid, consistent ensemble of characters and the acting that's put into said cast, but for me, something just didn't light up and made it breathtaking. More thoughts, if you will, but in spoilers
Spoiler: show
1. FXs were remarkable, I suppose, and even strangely with a "coherence" of the action, as opposed to how the trailers made it look like hot mess unfolding on your retina, but I'm just not the type to praise effects just for that; the only scene I disliked was the "enlightment" trippy voyage - I can understand the psychedelia element to it, but comic book visuals are one thing, cinema is a different medium, and this scene came out to me like a cascade of candy coloured silliness.

2. I think the movie's biggest flaw is needing to cram an origin movie with an action movie, to the point of either too much material or, rather in this case, too little believability in how the two are meant to come together: the former implies long, slow process; the latter implies quick, imminent danger. I'd say a clear rip-off analogy to the whole oriental training phase would be Batman Begins. Do you recall the baddie bursting through the doors in "oh hey here to take over the world k" fashion whilst the hero was taking his apprenticeship finals? Huh.

I think the movie's prologue, made to wow and appetize for the first seven minutes or so, created this issue. It then made it hard to understand (or believe) just how conveniently long it took for shit to go down only after the most of the stretch in which Strange went through his becoming-who-he-must-become process, or it rather threw Strange headlong into the confrontation, asking me to believe in him as an untrained, but gifted or intuitive underdog (seriously, Ombilicus or whatshisname displayed strength to KO literally everyone except Mordo, from top rank to bottom redshirts, but Strange, oh no, doesn't look like it can land a hit, that cheeky outplayin' fella).

3. All that cloak gimmick sort of pissed me off, tbh. Literally felt like I've been thrown in a Hogwarts-style comedic skit.

4. There was almost a hint of some substance this time to Villanicius or whatshisname, in that you could sort of see what drives his motivations or perception of how order should be (fanatical, but not maniacal), plus with every other character counting as "good" having its own duality and all, but man, MCU just doesn't care about creating any durable villain figure, it seems.
by Ricochet
Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:42 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

One more I didn't manage to write about, because too late at night yesterday.

The Commune (Kollektivet) - A few weeks ago I was saying that if you want to watch top quality family (melo)dramas, look no further than Asghar Farhadi's films, but I obviously seem to have forgotten about Thomas Vinterberg, who can also engrave disfunctional on any social / family-related story in very compelling ways. Although far from his artistically raved 90s Dogma movies, I personally think his 2012's The Hunt (starring Mads Mikkelsen) was an absolute stunner and it burned me inside to watch it. This movie, as far as I read, is meant to be one Vinterberg's most personal films and I can see where he's able to combine creativity with life inspiration in sketching such unsettling depictions, but I fear there's a disconnection between, on one hand, what the movie hints at being (from its name, poster trailers) - a couple turning the husband's old family house into a commune-style share one, with loose or whacky characters joining in and creating any interesting community to marvel at and take at face value - but only comes out half baked and, on the other, what it evolves into - the husband's affair creating a rift within the family, to the point of complete breakdown and disillusionment. The whole turmoil ends up very moving, mostly from some standout acting as well, yet this Vinterberg movie has "light" and "minor" written on it, on all levels. Certainly not even close to The Hunt's poignancy.
by Ricochet
Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:42 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

So seeing as I'm hardly in the mood for movies these days (just too damn busy and exhausted after work and rehearsals, day in day out, tbh), might as well address the few couple of ones I watched last week.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Mon Roi (My King), a drama by Maïwenn (maïwho) about a couple's (Emmanuelle Bercot and Vincent Cassel) rhapsodic-turned-histrionic affair-turned-marriage-turned-hell-on-earth. It stuck in my mind that it got pretty stinky press at last year's Cannes, yet the actress grabbed the award. Now, as this seems to be partly autobiographical, I can see the limitations in envisioning such a drama filled with glamour, shallowness or egomania. It also chooses a prehistoric-tier narrative unfolding (flashbacks) and the outbursts are innumerable to the point of redundancy, but I'd be lying if I wasn't won over, at least in the first act, by the flirtatious repartee; alas, sour grapes afterwards, and a bit too sour, indeed.

Arrival, the latest by Canadian Denis Villeneuve, who is in serious contention for my "favourite director of late" spot, although each of his new projects makes me fear he has entered full Hollywood territory (Prisoners, Sicario) - and duh, his next bus stop only happens to be an effin Blade Runner sequel - while his arthouse side will become of the past (Incendies, Enemy), but I find it safe to say this movie sort of has something of both worlds. Plus, you can further connect the dots between this movie and Contact (which, I have to admit, I was a sucker for when I was younger), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (which I... haven't seen... :grin:) or even Interstellar (although you might cringe a bit at the aspect that's common between these, if you're familiar with both works).

Anyhow, I almost don't wish to present much about it. It has to be seen and interpreted. I left the theatre with a maelstrom of thoughts in my head. There are pretty much three components that are merged together: a human/emotional story, the Sci-Fi phenomenon and political/mediatic strata. Does it all blend perfectly? Well, the human arc is nearly flawless in reaching out to your heartstrings, but since it requires the Sci-Fi narrative to make sense, it made me slightly wonder if there's not a bit of gimmickery in this. The Sci-Fi bit should prove satisfying, if you like it more cerebral, methodic and un-flashy (if not, reddit and 4chan await you to complain about it). The social commentaries are de gustibus. Amy Adams is pretty great and believable as the savant yet, at the same time, self-discovering protagonist, although I will not be holding my breath for any Oscar buzz, because it's simply not the type of range-explosive performance that 100-year old geezers at the Academy would care about (plus, Natalie Portman portraying Jackie must be reducing the odds by a lot, as well).

Anywho, I know it's the season for Marvel wizards and prequel Pottery and Rogue space opera, but I'd seriously recommend to go see this movie(, too). Intelectual, palatable, meaningful.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:52 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

M'kay, might as well write a first post for this year and see if I can turn it into regular updates. Doubtful, but here goes nothing.

Will pick up not from my last input in November, but only from the most recent movies I watched since Rogue One, for which I dedicated a different entry.

Color palette scheme as usual:
A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Indignation, one of two Philip Roth adaptations this year (and the better received one, considering that American Pastoral appears to have been pretty much panned). I am completely uninitiated in Roth's novels and only picked this because it showed up as a rather unique pick in this yearly best video montage. Seemed overall as a very poised, slow burning drama, with rather low-key actors in the mix (although I did recognize Sarah Gadon from some previous flicks, such as Denis Villeneuve's Enemy), heavy on character study and identity plot, while also polished with some aesthetic, cultural or historical appropriations. The protagonist's moral choices, dillemas and vexations are both elliptical and immediate. Is this what I should expect from the book, as well? Probably.

Hell or High Water, a well-made heist / western-like movie starring in serious acting mode, of all celebs, Chris Pine and also Jeff Bridges (who, for my own taste at least, has been really hammy in recent years, but seems to have found his normal range in this case), a movie that, to my surprise, turned out as an awards contender, so I had to cross it on my own list. The layout of the story and drama is quite basic - the robbers as two brothers, sharing a goal, yet divided in character (between intelligent poise and moony outbursts and between seeking an objective and seeking the sheer thrills of lawbreaking), versus an aging detective in search for his own last thrill of a cat-n-mouse procedural - but it is held up well by the script, the fleshed-out characterisation and the aesthetic grand vibe of the movie. Plus the extra gritty, McCarthian even, way in which all tensions lead to a final clash. Not sure I'm ready, after only one viewing, to call this masterful in any way, but it certainly calls to mind No Country for Old Men and I can't actually recall a more solid flick in the interval since.

Loving, Jeff Nichols' take on the story of the couple whose interracial marriage and ensued controversy led to the landmark '60s case of Loving vs. Virgina. Now, after having seen enough movies by this constantly acclaimed young director (Take Shelter, Mud, Midnight Special), I'm starting to feel that his style can be described as working well within certain genres, but always finding a way to enrich them or add something special, subtle, whereas most other filmmakers would come up with (more) mundane results. With this movie, I suppose the most subtle details or style choices would concern how it focuses almost entirely on the couple's life story (and their reserved way of coping with both their burdens and their hopes for a better resolution, plus with how their case ends up being of such justicial and historical significance), as opposed to showing much of anything from the court case itself, except for a few elliptical scenes and side actors which feel kinda... uninspiring; or how, for such a subject, it almost avoids any typical scenes of passive or open racist altercations (I counted three-four, tops, throughout the whole movie); or simply how intimate the drama is shaped out. Nonetheless, this still feels by the numbers and meant to earn easy high praise and award contention; it's probably the first in his filmography that, despite all the nice touches and nuances, doesn't feel elevated enough from the bunch.

===

New Years' Weekend provided a lot of junk TV watching, so the quality will drop with the following mentions. HBO especially has this custom of providing a "surprise NYE's midnight movie", except that it's always anything but surprising, especially this time, when it anticipated the moment by binging the first two Captain America movies. Wow, surprise, the midnight movie was Civil War! *rollseyes*

Truth be told, this movie can hardly be taken serious anymore on second viewing already. Compared to it, Winter Soldier almost holds up as enjoyable and senseful. If the MCU movie-making formula would not be so adulated by critics and fan(boys) alike, I'd say either this or Ultron is the jump of the shark moment. Alas, we'll get even more bloated and expansive and intertwined ones. This viewing also provided hilarity when my parents couldn't piece up the new cape characters between Winter Soldier and this one (because they never saw Ultron to make the connections).

A day later, there was also Deadpool, which is still fairly cool, although again, it proved too fast paced and quippy for 80% of the jokes to land in the living room.

There was also We Are Your Friends, a "serious acting mode" moment from Zac Efron, as an aspiring (and, at least, presented as talented, intuitive) DJ who looks for guidance in the "complex" combo of a pretentious mentor / life drunktard trainwreck (played by Wes Bentley), only for things to get complicated when the latter's bombshell / bombshell girl (played by Emily Ratatat...something?) enters in a love triangle mix. There's some wise-ass montages and scenes meant to carry a message about who this electronic genre should be more than mashed up sounds or on the need to look for real life / inward sources in creating art, that almost, almost land, but nah, not really.

===

Back to quality watching.

American Honey, by distinguished British female director Andrea Arnold, making her first film on U.S. soil. It earned her a third Jury Prize at Cannes and I've been a great fan in the past of her movie Fish Tank (she also did a recent version of Wuthering Heights, for those who might be interested). Just like in Fish Tank, Arnold seems to focus on the impassioned, rogue, sensible qualities of a youthful protagonist, whilst placing it in harsh, tough-life, self-discovering situations. Here, a young woman is recruited / seduced (by Shia LeBeouf's - in serious acting mode - character) to abandon her unfulfilling town life and join a nomad-like group of dirtbag teenagers on a rough road mission and pack adventures, involving scamming people in various places to subscribe for magazines, earning money day by day and yet finding some pleasure in this. It should be noted that most of the actors, except Shia and another one-two familiar faces, were street cast, so basically amateurs, including the main actress Sarah Lane, who is modeled into quite the magnetic lead character, certainly a sort of breakout performance. The movie is quite long and, while it has certain typical set pieces, it rather embraces riding the momentum than spiking towards a narrative or characterial fulfilment; it's almost impossible to describe on first viewing and it does open a scuzzy, grungy window into human drifting, but it's also elevated past any teenage wasteland, miserabilist connotations.

Aquarius, a Brazilian film by Kleber Mendonça Filho, also screened at Cannes, although without any special nods in the end. It stars Sonia Braga in a standout performance (close to the rarefied heights of Isabelle Huppert this year, to be honest) as an old woman, widower, retired music critic, in which the main conflict is between her and a company that wishes to take hold of and demolish the old-style, seaside apartment building in which she resides, with her being the last stand (as the last, dissident tenant), a conflict that bursts into a more and more despicable setpiece of harassment and mindgames on the company's behalf, that's run by old and young hounding antrepeneurs alike (probably to symbolise that no generation can be impassive to corruption). But the tale of old age is also able to pigment a personal story of family bonds or issues, burdens and nostalgia, experience, pride and flaws in human character and interaction. Reading all this, I'm not sure if I managed to describe too well what the movie is aiming for, but there is certain poetry (and music of course), visual sensibility and acting prowess in it. It's a loose, sprawling movie, but it can win you over with the storytelling and performances.

Fences, Denzel Washington's adaptation for the big screen of August Wilson's play. Certain to come up in regards to Denzel's push for another award or two, for what drives the movie is his spitting and rambling performance, as the difficult and hardheaded patriarch of a family that he'd rather fence (nudge nudge) on the inside from the outside world and any progressive ideas, something generated by his own life disenchantment or by his conservative sense against racial injustice. However, I'm afraid the movie is very much plagued by the adaptation from stage to screen syndrome, as it retains a lot of the theatricality without any cinematic compensation. There are no doubt some heavy ideas and moral dialogues that hit hard, all part of an original content that would surely prove riveting if seen on stage, but it's too damn safe in style and near Oscar-bait-ish for a movie. For a better example of a movie that retains its staginess effect, whilst also gripping as cinema, I'd recommend 2008's Doubt (the one with Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman).

And finally, rewatched Goddo supiido yuu barakku emparaa, the 70s documentary from which GY!BE derived their name, about an infamous biker gang, capturing some of its members' status as outlaws, day routines, gang interactions or conflicts, all interspersed with jap rock or soft ballads. Unfortunately, very low-key filmed and half of the material is not even eventful.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:22 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Now, Voyager - link
To Kill a Mockingbird
Oh, classic era Hollywood... why do I fail to be enamoured with your style and apparent fixity in narration, discourse and art direction? What films must I experience to get the most out of it? The best part of the former movie was that it allowed me (however surprisingly late) to get acquainted with Bette Davis, which seems to be a marvellous acting presence, though even in this regard, it felt a bit like an "ugly duckling" type of movie, tailored to allow her to blossom and shine throughout three quarters of the movie; quite undecided also in its mix of psychological drama and more typical romance / marriage plot. It's somewhat enjoyable, but also stretching thin in certain aspects of plot and tension.

As for TKaM, which I wanted to at least check after having finished the novel, it was fairly plagued for me by the adaptation vs. original complex. It is no doubt adequate and has Gregory Peck as a domineering presence, but it only covers so much from a more ample (and yet, at all times satisfying) narration in the book, plus I felt certain distance watching the movie's set pieces, whereas the book was so immersive and personal, I felt like following the kids right along in their adventures. Also a curio, while I hardly pick up on technical issues, there were two scenes that made use of zooming or something. Wha? I mean, literally stretching the frame, till it got all pixelated. Made me chuckle, even if one of those scenes was not intended to have such an effect.

O sangue - link
From Portuguese director Pedro Costa, don't recall if I mentioned this or not (it was either this or his latest, highly hermetical and beckettian Horse Money, or both), but I rewatched this after a somewhat failed first viewing, last summer, while on holiday in Portugal. Simple, bleak and cheerless story about the poor life of two brothers who have to deal with their father passing, his debts and their uncle's attempts to force custody upon the younger of them. Plus a teenage love interest for the elderly brother, who simply accompanies them in their moody, drifting troubles. Brings a bit of French wave to it, it's shot in austere, unsentimental style, meant to weigh in on you and it seems the kind of story about misery that doesn't aspire to grand resolutions. Even so, I feel I did not manage to follow it all the through, despite its brevity.

Paris, Texas - link
Another rewatch, since I kept this movie in my folder for months, and oh my word, I may be in love with this one. It's long, but it flows so well throughout every act, especially the first and last being absolutely magnetic. And it has so much angst and grief, but not in a way you'd necessarily identify with (looking at you, Kurt Cobain), but just in a way that suits and pays off in the story. Perhaps this movie is also deceptively complex or at least heavily stylish, given how its main themes surface, in the end, layer by layer.

Divines - link
A French drama, by female French-Moroccan director Houda Benyamina, that showed up somewhere on a top year list and also got the Camera d'Or at Cannes. Coming-of-age story of two close friends, toughing it out in their slum life, although it gradually focuses more on the one that is a force of nature bottled up inside, ready to blow, willing to do anything to live larger: associate with the neighbourhood drug band and engage in various chore making for them or get to flirt with a stallion-like, equally wild tempered person from a ballet company (for you see - cue heavy insert of symbolism - these girls may be mean and street smart, but they still found a strange affinity for snooping in and watching contemporary dance). It's all very ecstatic and stylish, in the vein of Girlhood from one or two years ago, and it makes pretty good work of a young, rogue, extroverted main cast, plus it's, dare I say, feminist and empowering, but with this being said, the more it turned its energy and tension to eleventy-stupid, the less I felt engaged in this phantasy-like build of a story and drama. Plus it builds up all the way to a banging, devastating finale that I felt I could have anticipated with an hour in advance. And on this matter, it also feels like it's a finale I've seen before, only in a different setting and focusing on younger protagonists - it was called The Selfish Giant, by Clio Barnard, and it managed to reach to my heartstringers, with sort of the same stylishness and overt dramaticality, far, far deeper.

Recordações da Casa Amarela (Recollections of the Yellow House)
And finally for this week, another rewatch just to clear my movie folder of another Portuguese movie, this time by Joao Cesar Monteiro. I still can't describe this movie very well. It almost seems like a simple story or comedic farce about an idiot-like old man, musing throughout his daily life, full of sickness, darkly humorous banal interactions or happenings, fanciful hobbies, unrequited cheeky lust, until it nosedives into absurd, dada scenes throughout the last act. A mystery of a film statement, at least for me.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:54 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

The Birth of a Nation (link), the heavily dramatized and partly historical depiction of the life of Nat Turner, an enslaved African American worker and preacher, who led a short-lived but echoing rebellion in the mid-19th Century. It's hard to judge the movie after one sitting, but at the same time, it's hard to tell how soon the second viewing might come. It's a directorial debut from Nat Parker and that in itself may be the source of both admirable and less good things about it. It has the passion to lay out a thorough, epic story and experience, but also the uneven ambition to hit all the high notes of drama and visual candy on max. It's grand, but also lavish and pompous at times. It sort of wants to be both 12 Years of Slave, in nuancing the scale of good and evil, prejudice and righteousness, (small) fortunes and (great) injustice, inside the universe of slavery, and Django Unchained, in building it up to a revenge plot, plus something alike Braveheart, in the tragic moral trials and emphatic defiance of the leading hero. It centers so heavily on Nat Turner, it blurs the lines between character study and iconography - not to mention between Nat Turner the character and Nat Parker the actor that wants to, again, hit all the notes. It no doubt wants to be a political statement, in addition to its typical biographical powerhouse drama - with its cheeky borrow of a title from Griffith's 1915's heavily racist movie and the feeling of surfing the current period of racial insecurity and Black Lives Matter wave. It doesn't shy away from depicting tragedy, cruelty and horrors, but it does shy away, as far as I understand, from certain or complete accuracies. So all in all, a both standard and questionable drama. Notable, yet flawed.

Tickled (link), a documentary with some buzz I figured I should check out. I see that its trailer is fairly generous in giving you some ideas of what happens, so up to a point I feel I can describe it without getting it spoiled - plus the documentary did / should prove rewarding in its further reveals, as well. Basically, a New Zealander journalist in search of a new bizzare/funny entertainment scoop comes across a site dedicated to "Competitive Endurance Tickling", only to be met with adversity and both legal and social harassment from the mysterious owners. At which point he decides to investigate in full and document the whole process on camera. One element missing the most is the cinematic flair, which I feel some recent documentaries were able to bring in equal measures to their content, so it relies on the investigative format and efforts above all else. But in this regard, it's one hell of a pandora box opened from a mere curiosity for a ha-ha material, revealing the extents of a business' power and bullying, plus some uncanny levels of human fetishism, injustice and sociopathy that may unknowingly surround us in the world.

===

Then, continuing from last week, another couple of rewatches, that either didn't work or didn't move me the previous times, yet were kept in my folder since:

Der Himmer über Berlin (Wings of Desire) (link), another 80s movie by Wim Wenders (I talked about Paris, Texas last week), with an imaginative, humane close-up of the lives of inhabitants of West Berlin, still divided at that time - guardian angels living amongst the humans, eavesdropping to their desires, problems, insecurities, or even getting immersed themselves in their lifestyle. Sounds so poetic and fantasy-like, I should love it, and yet it feels like a two-hour long drag, plus makes me wonder if it is that rich of a human introspection and urban ode. 'Cause somehow, I'm not feeling it.

Bergman's Winter Light (link), third attempt. Still not ready to put a colour on it, but it's improving with each viewing. Right now, I'm a bit shaken by the intricacy of human expressions and meanings in most scenes, gestures or script passages. As if the whole movie is subliminal towards deeper messages (and the answer to that is probably yes). In some cases, making me wonder if it's full sarcasm or just incertitude towards faith that's being suggested via a certain line of dialogue or expression. But the movie certainly projects an inner inquest over religion and the trials of human love, compassion and guidance.

Yoidore tenshi (Drunken Angel) (link), an early Kurosawa movie and the first of his to star Toshiro Mifune. It's incredible to think how inspired Kurosawa was to audition and cast Mifune, given that the latter exhibited already so much fiery skills and swagger, as a tough-acting and reckless, yet soul-suffering and disease-stricken lad. Furthermore, there's so much electricity in the interactions between him and a choleric, yet good-hearted doctor (Takashi Shimura) who wants to aid him. Alas, as the later acts develop, with more elements of yakuza conflict and endless backs and forths of the protagonist's recovery and perdition, meant to emphasize a tragic plot, it still can't hold my attention all the way through. The movie also has inserts of imported Western cultural elements that are supposedly meant to be politically charged, since this was made during the occupation years.

===

Finally, a new movie called Certain Women (link), which quite literally anthologizes, short story like (and the original source for this film does indeed seem to be a book in that format), three tales of, uhm, certain women (played by Laura Dern, Michelle Williams, Kirsten Stewart and Lily Gladstone), each having to cope either with work-related challenges, family issues, loneliness or existential stress. Their storylines are supposed to be also intertwined, but honestly, the connections are so minor, I doubt it's a serious element. If the movie was meant to be this slow-paced, intimate and weightless, highlighting the reverberations of human emotions in a more larger, more mundane setting encompassing them, that's all nice, but I struggled to find the richness and depth in this.
by Ricochet
Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:18 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Vompatti wrote:The last movie I saw was The Woman in the Dunes but I don't think I enjoyed it as much as I should have. So I give 8/10 to the movie and 4/10 to myself. :beer:
8/10 is pretty high and quite the opposite of something you don't think you enjoying as much as you should have k. :beer:

I'd say 7/10 and I enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed the book.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:10 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

So my new week of movie-watching proved quite the Oscarbait fest, especially given the predictable-in-all-regards nominations that were announced, but before I slash err dive into them with my much-to-be-expected cynicism and niggling, let me quickly mention a carry over from the previous week, that I forgot to write anything about, a 2014 adaptation of Madame Bovary (link), done with precious, pedantic filmmaking, but coming off uninspiring and rather dull - plus settling for a disorienting mix of English accents, which to disconnect from any possible original book flavor. Now, I understand empathy (or lack of) towards the protagonist and her condition / tragic story is a debatable issue in the novel, nevertheless I still felt the movie achieved the wrong notes on that. There is some distancing effect in the scenic and social boredom that's portrayed, but it almost veers into navalgazing, followed in the last act by pretty run-of-the-mill overdramatic crescendos. Mia Wasikowska's performance is kinda frost and all the men around her are complete no faces, whether it was Lloyd-Hughes who might have worked too hard on getting the most-boring-man-on-the-planet act right, the hipster romantic Ezra Miller or the prince macho Logan Marshall-Green. Perhaps one exception was Rhys Ifans, as the web-spinning, cold conniving Monsieur Lheureux. Yeah, I'll put him down as the MVP in this case.

====

Now, while I still have a few more movies to check, the internet has blessed with enough screeners this week to ascertain that Hollywood has outdone itself to be even more lackluster with its awards season crop than last year. Even the ones that I did like from this list feel a bit like getting a bye, due to how much there is to complain about the rest.

Hacksaw Ridge (link), Mel Gibson's return to directing and (given the reputation slump he's been during the past years) big-budget, accolade-grabbing works, adapting the story of Desmond Doss, a conscientous objector who enlisted despite his beliefs during WWII and served and saved lives straight on the battlefield of Okinawa. This topic honestly makes perfect material for both inspirational biopic-making and, given that it's Gibson we're talking about, war movie gruesomeness - and this combination is fairly straight. All the dramatic tropes and cheese are inserted to quickly cover Doss' life, romantic interests and moral challenges in joining the military, after which it's queasy time, as the war act unfolds with graphic violence and hecticism, Doss even disappearing for a while from the center of attention, until returning for his main shot, Oscar please grand climax. There's talk about how, for a movie centered on moral objections towards war and violence, Gibson's delights for gritty, bloody imagery almost thwart that message - and it's hard to argue against that. Andrew Garfield comes off a bit hammy in the biographical stages, but once thrown in the battle zone, I found his energy and acting much better. The movie also periodically makes you suffer through Vince Vaughn with his serious-acting-face on. Aaarrrrrrrrrggggggghhh. All in all, given that his last film, 10 yeas ago, was the controversial, but substantial and unique Apocalypto, this one feels quite lazy and drenched in cheap Gibsonian moves.

Hidden Figures (link) Honest, simple movie on the story of several African-American women scientists who rose to significant contributions in NASA's Space Program during the early 60s Space Race and later on. In the Oscars' narrow spectrum of what constitutes an Oscar-worthy movie, I'd rank this as the "Hallmark Channel type" (think Trumbo last year or My Week With Marilyn a while ago), nonetheless there's some sense of balance in covering the lifestories, the racial frictions of the period, the sentimental tones of the protagonists' conflicts or the strong acting. Guaranteed crowd-pleaser, but will I remember it in a month's time, even? No I won't. Can't lie about that.

Jackie (link), which started as a Venice Filmfest contender, but it was quite inevitable to end up in the Oscars' race as well (though it may have gotten less attention than expected - only Actress, Costume and Score nods). It covers with kaleidoscopic narrative jumps a fragment from Jackie Kennedy's life, between JFK's assassination, dealing with the aftermath of it, his funerals and opening up to the media (her Life interview with Theodore H. White). Given that it's made by Chilean director Pablo Larrain, there are certain good things you could expect: some degree of visual stylistic prowess (stemming all the way back to his 2012 pretty great No, which was intentionally shot to capture the 80s televisual period style; here, there is also a visual sheen that allows for smooth transitions between fictional movie scenery and original media footage) and some elements of a non-standard approach to creating a biopic. Then again, it was also bound to be more mainstream and have soft touches, compared to his arthouse, unflinchingly bitter El Club (which I reviewed a while ago). If you're ready to say this has Oscarbait written all over it, I would say Natalie Portman does an honest hard work and approximation in her acting and the directorial approach is also indiscriminate between honoring the former First Lady's persona and challenging the concepts of her public image, grace, grief and pretension, at the same time. But since the whole movie centers around a Life interview that even its writer later disavowed (Wiki: "White later described his comparison of JFK to Camelot as the result of kindness to a distraught widow of a just-assassinated leader, and wrote that his essay was a "misreading of history."), it's hard to not imagine that this movie also has a serious spoonful of fantasy.

La La Land (link) is a fine musical. A great one even, if you happen to enjoy life, music, colors, romance, puppies, kittens, Les parapluies de Cherbourg, ice cream, chocolate, rainbows.

But for a different view on it, read it below in spoilers at your own discretion

[/Mongoose]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spoiler: show

this is its color btw

So here's the thing, every two or three years a musical is destined to get Oscarbuzz and I normally flat out refuse to care about and watch it. I just know they're almost surely handmade industry tokens. They're almost surely never meant to win big, but them being nominated is just there to force me(/you/us) to take them into consideration. Nah. It was probably Hairspray or Mamma Mia! that broke the camel's back for me. And since: have not seen Burlesque. Have not seen Les miserables. Have not seen Into the Woods. I recall a wonderful diatribe written by ProgArchives member Dean on why musicals suck by default and, while I haven't really reached that same level of dislike for the genre, La La Land incidentally made me chuckle at the thought that it would fail the test, according to Dean's standards, from the very first minutes, in which a traffic jam is transformed into a common man spectacle of merrymaking and street dancing.

But anyway, on to why I did watch La La Land after all -- now that it equaled the record for most Oscar nominations (alongside Titanic and All About Eve... some cinematic Everest level this is, geeeeeez), has the most serious shots at Best Picture since 2002's Chicago and, apart from the acting roles and some other categories that might slip out of contention, by God if it's not aiming for at least 7-9 statues -- it mostly has to do with Damien Chazelle and the interest he held up since Whiplash, a fervent piece of moviemaking, if arguable in its big message and delivery.

How was it then? Well, with all this Oscarbuzz around it, making it "the movie most likely to win given the Academy's self-infatuation", is sure to damage a bit of expectations and affection, but, for what it's worth, I can believe that Chazelle genuinely wanted to pull an epic, brash musical movie, with the elements he's most comfortable with: music, tributary forms to old art (and bloody hell are they plenty, from musicals alone!!), self-realization narratives, pizzazz filmmaking. Problem is, it ends so jacked and jazzed up [pun intended] that it seems a braggadocio effort.

Here's what worked: I didn't feel the usual strain, towards the action and the actors' abilities, to push everything into musical territory. It was still a competent, normal flowing drama, without trying to transpose every significant fragment into an aria. Indeed, except the heavy first 15 minutes or so, I felt it's quite musical light - or at least it often fused its musical numbers with other genres, like jazz, orchestral, dance etc. I kinda appreciated this. I kinda appreciated that the leads' voices were not overworked to pitch perfection.

-- In between this and the following category I'd place Emma Stone. I think she pulled the better effort here: quirky, sarcastic, bitter, emotional at various times, but vibrant through and through. --

Here's what made me feel nothing: a) it wasn't entrancing; it was a spectacle alright, but it wasn't entrancing; there were truly some moments, some seconds in which the mix of music, acting, coreography and scenery clicked and felt wonderful, but that was it; b) the American Dream fantasy storyline was quite thin and as much as the genre required; c) equally so, its technical and stylistic merits are all in there, bursting with both finesse and grandeur, but also being as artificial as the genre/industry normally demands it

Here's what's debatable from it: a) the romance chemistry - I would neither say it exists, nor that it doesn't. The Stone - Gosling coupling did not surprise me, since it is so overplayed by now (Stupid Crazy Love, Gangster something) and I think it's more an issue with Gosling playing the smug type so much that creates dissonance from a typical lovey-dovey mindframe; so if you'll expect the soulmatey type of romance connection, you'll likely be disappointed; if you like a more realistic romance, generated by shared dreams and goals, but also challenged by life and emotional hardships, this could make more sense to you; b) the amount of originality vs tributing; the movie can hardly breathe under its own glossy, tattooed with decades of musical history skin; c) the amount of elements that could be described as "subverting the tropes", like the mundane storytelling, the down-to-earth setting and ambitions of the characters, some of the deadpan twists in the romance's interactions and dialogue; they're present, but it just didn't click to me to the extent I feel Chazelle might have wanted to wow us with

Here's what fails: the preachiness (carried over from Whiplash, tbh) about true art forms (Jazz in Whiplash, for instance, meant only "muh Buddy Rich", here, jazz is reduced to namecalling Thelonious Monk and a few others; pretty disappointing elitism, if such); the feeling that this is a truly above average or even masterful product of its genre.
Manchester by the Sea (link) In light of having just cut deep into most of the movies above, you'll probably hate me for colouring this one a bit better, given that it's close to Infinite Sadness - The Movie, about a reclusive, divorced man with a troubled past who must deal with becoming the guardian of his nephew, once his brother passes away. One thing I was surprised is that I didn't recognize its director, Kenneth Lonergan, from his previous effort, Margaret, which I couldn't stand. This one fares slightly better, although the dramatic overtones feel just as implacable. Casey Affleck does a noteworthy performance on a multitude of shades of grey, so to speak: cloistered, bitter, mopey, grieving, profoundly depressed; quite small oscillations there. This is a slow burn of a story and while it could be labeled as "redemptory drama", it might still leave you wondering towards its end. You'd probably understand better if you saw it or will see it. Which you should. At least once.

And finally for this week, Moonlight (B- or maybe B color, idk yet) (link), the critically beloved three-part chronicle (literal transitions between child, adolescent and adult phases) of a black young man and his struggles with social inclusion and with his own sensitivities and sexual identity (hint: it's homosexuality). If there are movies I'd rewatch, it'd be probably be Jackie and this one. For one, it went by so fast, bewildering me with its soft, straight, but at the same time sparse, elliptical narrative. Sometimes it has more minutes of silence and visual-sensorial or gestical flickers than substantial dialogue. If that's meant to be the concentrated essence of this highly poetic and feeble movie, pretty sweet, but I still have to decide whether its themes are broad or archetypal.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 28, 2017 4:37 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Golden wrote:Everyone I know who went to see Laa Laa Land either walked out or wanted to, and said lots of other people did. My mother called it 'popular in Hollywood because they wrote a movie about themselves, but it just makes them look sad.'

We were going to go see it, but now we've changed our mind. It baffles me that I've had such a consistency of 'it's not very good' from people I know who've seen it, and it gets 14 Oscar nominations.
Yikes.

I don't think it's walk out or miss out material, despite the criticism, although it's up to any moviegoer, of course. You could also certainly wait for a home release a few months from now, if that's yer thing, although you'd then be stuck with a purchase you may not like, rather than a movie showing that simply did not deliver.
Golden wrote: Rico, as for musicals - forget Burlesque, forget Into the Woods (it had its moments, but as a whole felt a little too much like a stage show on the screen). But Les Miserables was different for me, and still worth seeing, unless you know you don't like the story. I found Hugh Jackman transcendent and it remains the only time that Russell Crowe has ever managed to make me care about his character.
Didn't say I'm unaware of stuff that went on in the movie or a few scenes. I just didn't sat down to watch it in full. Crowe's performance is... either ballsy or no-fucks-given. Tho not sure what the difference would be, in his case.
by Ricochet
Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:28 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I forgot to note the score for Jackie, which was done by Mica Levi, British classical composer, and also stands out a bit in the movie. Atypical at times, not the smoothest or most traditional accompaniment to scenes unfolding and maybe not as otherwordly as Under the Skin, but still good.
by Ricochet
Sun Jan 29, 2017 4:29 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Heh, Dragoniel D.ay Lewffis was easily the best thing about Lincoln. But I can agree that, out of the three Oscars he received, this felt like the easiest one handed out. That year's Best Acting should have easily, easily gone to Joaquin Phoenix for The Master, but it was 2deep4Academy. Don't know how he does it, but almost all Phoenix's recent roles (The Master, Her, Inherent Vice, less so Irrational Man) have been nothing short of transcendental.
by Ricochet
Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:14 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A much lighter list this week, due to certain events and business that kept me busy during the evenings. Wrapping up my major Oscar season binge first and then moving on to other recent films on my watchlist.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Lion (link) Strange late bloomer (premiered at Toronto in September, yet screened in theaters only starting November in the US and January elsewhere) to have garnered critical buzz and end up with multiple Academy nominations, including Best Picture - enough to turn to me into a headshaker and have me believe it has Weinstein's lobbying fingerprints all over it. Thing is, it's not even half bad as an inspirational movie (even if it eventually drops into full melodrama) -- a young poor Indian boy, scrapping for coal with his brother, that gets accidentally separated from his family, getting lost in a deadheading train thousands of miles away from home, ending up on the streets, in an orphanage, then adopted by an Australian family, only to later, as a young adult, try to track down his family -- but I have not detected any details that would set it apart from the usual heartstring-tuggers that are churned. Plus, I went into this movie knowing nothing and yet, halfway through, I started sensing it had "based on a true story" written all over it, which proved to be the case. Dev Patel as the adult protagonist does a creditable job in acting gradually obsessed and consumed by his desire to reconnect with his homeplace, although I wouldn't say his range as that is particularly big, plus he nosedives along with the movie into emotional cheese during the last 10 minutes or so; Nicole Kidman, as the adoptive mother, does nothing whatsoever to warrant an Oscar Nomination; heck, even the less visible Rooney Mara is slightly more notable as Patel's sympathetic, if frustrated by his shut in feelings, girlfriend. Apart from any critical view and standards, this should prove an enjoyable, heartfelt movie, but given all its buzz right now, nah, you would have to consider it as slight bait just as much.

Silence (might go up to B, who knows) (link) - oh, toughie one here: impossible to rate after a first watch, but at the same time demanding to sit again through its three hours, anytime soon; has the hallmarks of beautiful, erudite, epic Scorsese, but also feels like it doesn't quite have the overall focus to reach deep into artistic and philosophic profundity. Some of you may have read that this was a long-time, long-postponed passion project for Scorsese, ever since making The Last Temptation of Christ - which I would wholeheartedly recommend, even if it might set on flames the blasphemy-o-meter for more religious people around here; it has without doubt true cinematic virtues - and while it is a far less "agnostic" religious movie than that one, it still deals with themes related to the trials of fate. Its synopsis is quite simple: two Jesuit priests (Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver) go to Japan, during its difficult 17th Century climate of hunting down and persecuting Christian priests and converted locals, in search for their mentor (Liam Neeson), upon hearing news that he might have apostatized. The movie starts with the two priests both pursuing their goal and fulfilling their mission to propagate the faith further, after which it focuses more and more with Garfield's character's own predicaments of facing persecution. The movie is not devoid of some rather convenient moves from Scorsese: the casting of familiar faces (Garfield, Driver, Neeson); the odd intent to cast the priests as Portuguese, yet lazily resort to mostly everyone in the movie, even the Japanese characters, speaking English; the expected maxing of violence and emotional or devotional despair. On the bright side, though, its Japanese supporting cast seems extraordinarily strong and the narrative, despite its extreme stretch, could be described as holding up quite well. Overall, if any of you are familiar and felt that his previous Wolf of Wall Street was too on the nose with its opulence and Scorsesian cheekiness, this might come off as a much more pious, thoughtful and balanced movie. I still have to decide, though, if it's meant to be up there with his finest. Not quite the believer on that matter.

Under the Shadow (link). Did a bit of a sloppy watch with this one, but here are my first impressions. British-produced Iranian psychological horror movie about a mother and a daughter having to cope not only with the war terrors and perils during the Iran-Iraq 80s war, but with evil spirits hauting their home. This movie could be easily catalogued along with the new wave of smart(er), abstract, less-is-more horror films such as The Babadook, Goodnight, Mommy or It Follows. In fact, I feel it could be easily dubbed as "The Babadook of Tehran", since it works with and delivers a straight haunt movie narrative, but one which could also translate into the distraught relationships within the family. Contrary to the The Babadook, I'd add that this movie did arguably have some actual, decent, well-timed scares. I liked it, especially for a few memorable scenes, including one in which the mother relentlessly, ritualistically works out at home to some VHS tapes of Jane Fonda aerobics, but did I like like it, I wonder? Who knows. If you want your horrors to be a full on spectacle of spookoo, even if riddled with clichés, this might not satisfy your need, but if you appreciate the less-is-more wiser approach, you should check it out.

Allied (link), a new Robert Zemeckis, starring Brad Le Pitts and Marion Cotillard in a romantic WWII / spy thriller mashup, one rather remembered by the critics for its shortcomings and its Casablanca-styled imitative aspirations. Yet I have to say, I went into this expecting nothing but woeful, forgettable cheeseball, and it turned out a much more decent experience... at least until the cheeseballs were indeed served. Its first act, in which Le Pitts infiltrates as a secret agent in occupied France and is matched up in fake marriage with Cotillard's character, so they can plot and carry a high profile assassination, is strong and charming - with particularly seductive, assured acting from Cotillard. I would even applaud the extensive language training that Le Pitts seemed to have undertaken for this role (as opposed to, say, his (likely intentional) half-assed dialects in Inglorious Basterds). Even Cotillard's English has improved or at least focused greatly. Sadly though, once the Casablanca affair concludes, they get romantically involved and relocate to Britain, it switches to a spy story on how Cotillard might be a double agent after all, and the thriller goes quite dour, mainly because the focus is taken away from Cotillard's magnetic, swaying presence and cast on Le Pitts, who suddenly couldn't be more stiff in acting out the emotional and tactical complications of this possible betrayal. So I found it rather sad that the movie did not hold up at all in the end.

And finally, I rewatched Villeneuve's Arrival. I just gave it a 6 on IMdB (mind you, though, my "quite good / real good" scale is usually at 7 over there), which feels like a step back in appreciation, but I would say it's because a) I don't think it's as well done and valuable as Sicario, for instance (not to mention Enemy, his arthouse-iest delight) and b) my mood has been embittered by the overall quality of Oscar season this year. Might bump it to 7 in the future, idk. One thing I feared this second watch was that, having experienced its big finale twist once, it wouldn't feel the same the second time. Fortunately, I can report that, while that may be an issue upon repeated views, the movie still holds up and I even felt less jumpy and eyebrow-raising at some of its twisted logic revelations than I felt in the theater, the first time. That's gotta count as a positive, right?
by Ricochet
Sat Feb 11, 2017 9:11 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

The Edge of Seventeen (link) or what is meant to be the indie movie of the year from within the main Hollywood caravan, yet, while most such indiecoms are generally meant to bounce right off me, I swear I couldn't think of a more half-assed project this year once I finished watching this. Overall, its aim is to add to the bulk of John Hughesian, high-school dramedies focusing on teen angst and social niche mismatch, while amping up the levels of dark / deadpan / awkward comedy and the protagonist's youthful imbalance of outspoken cynicism, grief or social anxiety (the gist is that our main girl's - Hailee Steinfeld - world comes tumbling down when her BFF hooks up with her brother, leaving her stranded in a pool of [even more] intense negativity and disconnect from almost anyone else in the community).

I think what doesn't work with the movie are the precise things it may try to charm us with: the uncanny prevalent brooding or sharp tone and the pay off. Steinfeld - making a true notable return, as far as I'm concerned, only since True Grit - does a commendable effort to play this bluesy, erratic, atypical lead teen figure and shout out even to Blake Jenner (the brother in the story) who can apparently play a jock with flair and substance in any situation (he also played one this year in Linklater's Everybody Wants Some!! which, for my money, is the true - if bathing in retro - indie jewel of the year). Meanwhile, Woody Harrelson...I think some of the posters even highlighted the bond between his character and the main girl, a sort of off-the-wall student-teacher mentorship, but it's probably the most deceiving part of the entire movie, because Woody's scenes are too few and far in between and they don't add up to anything: there are like five identical scenes in which the girl comes in class freaking out and the teacher approaches the kick-some-sense-into-her solution via wisecracking quippy sarcasm, plus a more fatherly-behind-all-the-facade later scene... and I chuckled alright at the former, because they were hilarious, but was there any real pay off?

At its best, I almost sensed that this movie tried to deliver a peculiar message about how negativity sometimes means just as much to poison yourself from within as to not be able to click with the world around you, thus making the protagonist a sort of anti-heroine, whose self-deprecation and rejection are questionably over-the-top and egocentric and whose "coming-of-age", in the end, comes closer to "getting your head out of your ass". But can you fully sell something like this to the mass audiences, in need of their laughs, romance awws and predictable plot developments? Of course not. Hence the pedestrian set pieces, despite the glaze of dark comedy on top of them.

Right Now, Wrong Then (link) - whose original title is so quirkly long and weird, I just have to mention it: Ji-geum-eun-mat-go-geu-ddae-neun-teul-li-da - apparently not the first movie by Sang-soo Hong I've watched (Nobody's Daughter Haewon), though I don't remember much from it. With this movie, one could almost joke that this is how South Korean cineasts envision romcoms, since it is a story of a filmmaker on a business trip who gets enamoured with a stranger and the date goes quite weird, due to his awkward social skills and several faux pas... only for the story to be rebooted completely, with alterations that lead things into a different, seemingly more favorable direction. If your first thought would be that such gimmick of crafting the same movie twice - which apparently is not even the first time this director is doing it :o - would instill boredom upon viewing, well, in some ways that effect could surface, especially since its aesthetics are also fairly minimal and its pace is slow, nevertheless I think there was enough chemistry between the lead characters and humor or emotion to carry some of its moments; plus it resembles that quality of Eric Rohmer's movies, rich in dialogue and interaction if not much else to the naked eye, in which people just talk and talk, acting both philosophical and cursory in their thoughts. One theme this movie might go for, and that I've seen come up in other reviews, would be how the artist can use (or manipulate) the language of his art to his own will and thus tailor the amount of reality or fantasy he puts in his story or drama or whatever content he chooses - the equivalent of a date gone wrong that you'd later wish you could just dial the clock back and do it the right way. Anyway, bit hard to recommend a movie whose two-hour running is literally generated by a one hour act and a complete variation of it, but this was not bad at all.

Krisha (link) - a concise, poignant Thanksgiving drama about an old woman trying to reconnect with her family, despite some troubled past issues. The drama boils up nicely from its apparent conciliatory opening tone, complete with quirky, menacing, bomb-ticky background music, gradual cracks in the family interactions and the protagonist's psyche, even in sync with, oh sweet analogy, the turkey getting roasted in the oven. Plus the big family reunion depicted has a combination of conservative and hipster elements: they have like a bazillion dogs in the house and some of them blabber on about spiritual integrity and practices, whilst matriarchal and/or patriarchal elements are also on full display (the women nursing to their chidren or preparing the meal, while the men watch football, wrestle in the back garden like bros and such). But mostly, this movie deals with psychological pressure and demons of the past you cannot always deal with it - or rather, for which you cannot always be forgiven by others. While this is neatly etched in frame by its debutant director, I'd also say there's a bit more style than substance put into it, plus I didn't feel I'll remember or revisit this one any time soon.

L'avenir (Things to Come) (link), a new, awards-gifted (Silver Bear for Directing) movie by Mia Hansen-Løve, a director who might fly under your radar (in which case you should correct that), but whose past three movies I've seen and liked, including this one - 2011's Goodbye First Love, a rare instance of a youthful, capricious and misguided romantic drama that I've actually loved, and 2014's Eden, which I've shortly noted in the past. Her movies always appear to be small scaled, intimate in depiction as well as quasi-referential in creativity, although even with this movie there are hints of bigger themes nudged forward: the protagonist is a philosophy teacher, so naturally a lot of references and allusions come up; social instances of what appears to have been student strikes during the (2010?) pension reform protests: plus the teacher meeting again with a past eminent, gifted student that seems to have, nevertheless, embraced communard anarchy. But deep down, this movie is nothing but the personal drama of a woman who experiences, late in her age, a lot of separations and losses, and must deal with it and with "the things to come". And what better actress to render this than the lovely Isabelle Huppert, capable to act so emancipated and vulnerable within the same range. Contrary to Verhoeven pushing her in Elle to be as sardonic, acerbic and stony-hearted as possible, in light of all grievances and adversities - a performance that was, nonetheless, mindblowing - Hansen-Løve allows more natural and raw emotion from Huppert, while also pushing for the same note of not yielding to any sorrowful circumstances. Soft spoken filmmaking and atmosphere, lively pace and visuals (photogenic frenchiness and/or parisianess, so to speak) and the usual dash of French chic, all making a pleasant viewing, one that could turn out among the best of the year, in hindsight.

And finally, on the more lunacy-driven side of French cinema, Alain Guiraudie's new movie Rester vertical (Staying Vertical) (link), a fairly risqué and weird flick, if that wouldn't be the case with all of his ouevre. While his previous Stranger by the Lake proved such a shocker and surprise delight for me, if its combination of gay romance and chilling thriller could be regarded as plausible and described as such, this one didn't quite land well. "A screenwriter going into rural pilgrimage, in search of inspiration, only to hook up and have a baby with a shepherdess" is about the straightest narrative that could be shared, before things go quite batshit, with, as expected from Guiraudie, full elements of homoeroticism, the protagonist facing conflicting, contradictory opposition from everyone around him and everything happening to him, plus some scenes that just shoot into magic realism fantasy, without any discernible meaning or connection. Nah.
by Ricochet
Wed Feb 15, 2017 3:27 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A Person wrote:If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
What impresses me the most about Enemy is that it is not only a great mindfuck of a standalone movie, it is also a great adaptation of a mindfuck of a book (Saramago's The Double). The adaptation is overall straightforward, but Villeneuve also finds and includes an extra psychological layer, that completely works.
by Ricochet
Wed Feb 15, 2017 5:24 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Enemy > Sicario > Incendies > Arrival > Prisoners

Polytechnique and the rest are ?? at the moment
by Ricochet
Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:27 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Or better yet, wait for Sonemic? (Or whatever the film branch will be called)

Is that still happening?
by Ricochet
Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:24 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

My movie log points out I've apparently hit the 800 mark on unique movies watched. Started keeping this list four and half years ago.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Trois souvenirs de ma jeunesse (My Golden Days) (link), a 2015 movie by Arnaud Desplechin, which I believed for a while to be a solo story, but turns out it was a prequel conceived for an earlier 1996 movie of his, Comment je me suis disputé... (ma vie sexuelle) (My Sex Life... or How I Got Into an Argument) (link). So I just binged the both of them, on consecutive days - quite the binge, too, since they totaled five hours. The cinematic touch and style has also experienced visible changes between the 20-year span - more neutral, focused on the acting, in the 90s, more potent in its cinematography and chic-ness nowadays.

While my impressions evolved backwards, I'll try to present them now in chronological order. The 1996 movie presents the story of a middle aged man (played a very young looking Mathieu Amalric at that time, but just as idiosyncratic in his acting as always) who's stuck in a bit of an existential rut (overdue, unfinished doctorate in philosophy; unfulfilling teaching position where he must suddenly face an old foe; a 10-year long up and down relationship with main love-of-his-life figure Esther - played by Emmanuelle Devos - and numerous others love interests or hanky-pankies). Not only overly long (nearly three hours), but also fairly indulgent in its weaved narrative, this seems to be the usual bourgeois social drama the French usually do, with a lot of musings and ramblings, emotional or hormonal tantrums, humor and romance and such. I was either not patient enough or failed to detect any particular detail that sets Desplechin's way of doing it apart from others. Still, I liked a few moments and a couple of the actresses (Devos, as well as Marianne Denicourt, as a very passive-agressive secondary love interest). The new movie reintroduces the protagonist years later in his mid 40s, only to provide some semblance of narrative support for him to reflect back on his adolescence - literally three particular moments, the first two a bit short and flimsy (scenes from a trouble childhood and an escapade into Mother Russia, respectively), followed by the one that counts the most, mainly how he met and fell in love with the abovementioned Esther. Watching this without any knowledge of prequel shenanigans, I thought the three-story act was a bit disjointed and in the end I could still fault it with this. But even here there was a pretty solid choice in the actress playing the younger version of Emmanuelle Devos and a few sequences to like. I just didn't feel any depth to this drama-making, nor felt compelled by this overarching human saga. I'd color Trois souvenirs so and Comment je me suis dispute... so.

Câini (Dogs) (link), a new Romanian thriller/neo-western that screened at Cannes' Un Certain Regard and set itself apart this year for being just that: a Romanian movie in a genuine hardboiled thriller/neo-western style. The main anectode is that our so called New Wave, while getting its fair share of praises and awards year after year, is also criticised (mainly poor audience feedback) for being so shut-in in its realism, ultra-minimalist, ultra-aesthetic, heavy on long takes and dialogue and silences and 2deep4u psychological layers. Compared to which Dogs is indeed sort of refreshing: clear-cut, incisive and gritty, minimal but in a way it generates tension and sharp lines of dialogue, variegated in its crimson-ranged environmental nuances. A thriller of throbbing pulses at first that you just know will burst and spray all over later on (you can read the synopsis on IMDb, if you want, what's written there is basically it). It's not an unique recent experience, since there have been a few other thrillers or "newwave"-genre-evading attempts, even this director (Bogdan Mirică) having previously made a TV show for local HBO in the same vein, albeit with too much urban slum talk and realism in it. This movie has been broadly said to be taken almost from a Cormac McCarthy handbook, to the point of looking quite derivative - something I can't myself argue against, although, overall, it still felt valuable in its own way and refreshingly smart and composed in its realization.

Weiner (link), a recent documentary that covered the controversial political figure's sexting scandals and career downfall, mainly during his bid for resurrection during the 2013 NY mayoral campaign. Not sure how much depth I would say this feature has, given that it mostly chronicles the 2013 period, with direct focus on Weiner, his wife, his campaign staff, his detractors or the media, but since it appears that Weiner allowed consistent real time access and inquiry during the events, it almost fascinates me that this could have originally been a documentary meant to highlight Weiner's return to glory, only to go into trainwreck mode afterwards, changing thus the narrative halfway through. As for the story itself, while I was aware of some of the details (from watching the bulk of TV late show satirists), it was still pretty hard to fathom just how much of a foresight-less damaged doofus this man has been. Much of the heartbreak will probably be provided by seeing his wife, Huma Abedin, struggling through all of this shitstorm and wave after wave of betrayal and shock, following a period of reconciling and even pulling lobby strings to push Weiner back into office contention. Her entire body language in the documentary is "I cannot even".

And finally The Founder (link), the story of Ray Kroc who, as an early failing salesman, fortuitously discovered the McDonald brothers' small, but innovative and modern-thinking burger restaurant and struggled then succeeded to franchise the shit out of it. While aware that a more positive take on this movie has been written and mentioned here, I have to confess I couldn't have been more bored watching this after a third of it or so - even opened the Friday Chatzy to hang out there in the process. Part of this, I reckon, has to do with director John Lee Hancock, who has yet to show any sign of cinematic style highmark (though, technically, The Founder is his best yet). Really typical American Dream biopic framework. He directed before The Blind Side, which was a complete dud and an infuriating cheeseball awards-contender (earned Sandra Bullock that Oscar) and Saving Mr. Banks which... ergh. Interesting enough, both this and Mr. Banks seem to show Hancock's inclination for certain stories - and even period pieces of American history - both highlighting a visionary figure (Walt Disney / Ray Kroc) who nevertheless took questionable steps in bringing someone else's creation (P.L. Travers / McDonald brothers) towards a bigger audience (Mary Poppins / the food megachain that is today McDonalds), arguably corrupting a bit of its initial quality or standards in the process. As for The Founder, while, yes, it does highlight capitalist expansion and smart skilled booming at its finest, it also highlights the different stages of Kroc's driving ambition, perhaps not in a way that's ultimately on a moral high note. Maybe it was a naive viewing from my part, but towards the end Kroc become a fairly questionable, reprobate character. Keaton and Offerman in particular do a competent portrayal, but the rest of the script and settings felt like a no face, no substance basic filmmaking affair. From a movie viewpoint, this couldn't have felt more generic and Hollywood fodder in its chronicle of big moments, figures and such.
by Ricochet
Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:29 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Rewatched Silence. Guess I could bump the grade, even though I still feel it's somehow far from the best thing Scorsese could have crafted. One aspect I picked on the second time is how much Christic parallels and undertones are put in - probably how they were put in the original novel, as well - sometimes not even in a particularly subtle way: without spoiling much, there is a literal Judas-like character, for instance. I suppose this still adds a degree of how much Scorsese wanted to polemise on issues of fanaticism and willful martyrdom, just like it does on issues of faith, "God's silence" (very Bergmanesque topic btw), etc.

Paterson (link) - "A-ha"

or

Jim Jarmusch's latest, who as always tends to pull something from his bag of tricks with each movie. His previous, Only Lovers Left Alive was a lavish, cult existential vampire flick - if a fusion like that can even sound legit - that could have been equally (and has been) accused of having a hollow swag, but which I nevertheless, for the most part, really liked. And this time, it almost feels like he wants to subvert expectations and meet them at the same time. This movie is a most intimite, urban drama whose minimalism, simplicity and "everyman-ness" couldn't be more on the nose: the protagonist is a bus driver (played by Adam... Driver) called Paterson who lives in... Paterson. He drives the bus every work day. He walks the dog and goes to have a drink at a bar in the evening. He also has a passion for poetry, writing daily inspired by the tiniest details in his activity - his poems walking the fine edge between plain & corny and holding up nicely once finished - and mostly keeping them for himself. He has a loving, beautiful wife who goes for a mix of hipster-at-heart creativity and joie de vivre and pretentious daydreaming or nagging. His ivory towel takes the shape of a very variationless routine in his life and marriage. So basically this movie pushes the idea of monotony and un-happening, while its more serious themes nevertheless surface in a more or less subtle way: the pop culture references, that Jarmusch can rarely shake off, are assured by the bar's bartender's hobby for Paterson-related memorabilia; there is inherent poetry and bohemy inside an austere, 8 to 5 work schedule or matrimonial activities; there is sadness and stoicism to how the protagonist sees his life and goals; you can sense ripples of great tension, yet Driver is directed to perform the most imperturbable, tenderhearted man possible. If you cannot already tell from how much I extracted out of a movie that was supposed to test my patience or prove simple or shallow, I ended up quite loving this.

Extra movie trivia: this movie also gave me the impression that it is the antithesis of a much darker, difficult movie, Bela Tarr's 2011 The Turin Horse (link). Over there, the sense of repetition and minimalism was an expression of life's burden and escathological strip of meaning. Jarmusch instead aims, apparently, for an ode to the common man and his endurance throughout life.

Rewatched Moonlight. Guess I could bump this one to a B as well. If there's an Oscar nomination that has more artistic flair to it and should be counted as above the rest, might as well be this one.

Rewatched L'avenir (Things to Come), the French philosophical, existential drama with Isabelle Huppert. Firmly staying in the top tier of this year. Just lovely.

La fille inconnue (The Unknown Girl) (link), a new movie by the Belgian Dardenne brothers, who have been releasing projects at a very steady pace during the last few years, all appearing to veer more and more into austere, anonymous social drama vignettes. Even their charm seems to be subduing - 2011's The Kid with a Bike was a nice coming-to-age tale; 2014's Two Days, One Night was a passable drama that reflected on middle-class issues. This one narrows the focus and tightens the frame even more, on a female doctor who proceeds to investigate the death of a young black woman, after she might have indirectly contributed to it due to a brief moment of indifference. This movie didn't caught on much at Cannes and elsewhere and I fear it didn't make a serious impression on me either. While I don't dislike Adele Haenel's frostier, more impassive acting, this felt like a bit stretchy and... pun intended... sterile procedural-like drama, that seriously made me "dose off" (as in start doing other things while watching) and even not pick up much on its who, what, how endgame. My bad on the latter, perhaps, but still, not the most memorable Dardenne effort - and, again, bit worrying it its austere, trivial stylistical direction.

Rewatched Jackie. Remains notable pretty much only for Portman's intense character study and the sense of slight directorial boost, coming from Pablo Larrain, who won't settle for the easy narrative path in anything.
by Ricochet
Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:17 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Slowly getting back in the groove, after having taken a week off

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

20th Century Women (link) found me in a weird mood, half feeling like a chore to watch this, as a sort of post-Oscars leftovers (as indeed this received Globes movie & acting nominations, after which it only got a Screenplay nod and that was that). Part of it looks like "Let's Put Benning Back in the Limelight - The Movie", as she plays an emancipated single woman, that's nevertheless insecure in her upbringing ways of her pubescent son; her slight nostalgia and out-of-touch-ness with new trends - which appear to be synthesized and presented as "punk rock" and "Talking Heads" - are also additional traits, turned into running gags at times. Their living place is more of a boarding house, facilitating the presence of other supporting characters: Billy Crudup as the most light-macho and laidback male figure possible; Greta Gerwig as the most feminist (i.e. she's a feminist) and hipster (i.e. she's an artist) younger female figure possible; and Ella Fanning, as a stray cat teenager that bonds openly with the son in the story, flaring up his affection while friendzoning him hard at the same time. Despite the title, the movie doesn't seem decided in its presentation between an overt exposition of the three female figures' flawed and volatile personalities and a coming-of-age tale for the kid, as he receives a moral and sentimental education from each of the three women in his life. The director, Mike Mills (who also made Beginners 6 years ago, which I remember failing to connect with much) also seems to add a bit of WesAndersonian flavor to some of the narration cuts and editing style, to draw from the Noah Baumbach hipster-flavored dramatization textbook and maybe a bit from Cameron Crowe's Almost Famous, too, in regards to the mother-son bonding. At its worst, the movie has been described by critics as smug and explanatory, instead of naturalistic, in its themes of end-of-70s malaise, feminism and cultural period cues. At its best, I suppose Benning's duality in how she handles (and mishandles) arising tensions is a nice touch. There are some good moments and even some sparks of wicked humor, but I just couldn't feel determined to indulge much in this eccentric and quirky fusion of indie drama.

A Man Called Ove (link) which, by contrast, was a complete chore, given its inclusion in the Best Foreign Language final five, surely as a mere token towards Scandinavian (comedy-drama) flicks. If you've seen in the past and enjoyed movies with grumpy, stingy old grinches whose hearts grow three sizes under a new influence (whether it's a child, a family or a new random person they meet) and whose life stories open up (with flashbacks), you'll find it just as lighthearted and sentimental. Myself, as an eternal grinch, I was playing games on my tablet after the first half hour already. Nothing here surprised or elated me.

A Monster Calls (link), an intriguing and darkly toned fantasy film, developing a reclusive, sad boy's coping with his mother's terminal illness into a manifestation of a giant yew tree monster. Clear elements of folk stories, fables and fantasy mirroring reality are crafted pretty well for the genre and both the visual and acting skills are at full levels - plus, in a way, its resolute brooding tone reminded me a bit of Pan's Labyrinth, which is certainly a nice throwback. On the minus, the intensity of the drama is at times a tad too neurotic and there were moments when the CGI didn't wow me (or somehow the wow factor decreased). It's been also said that it may be slightly too dark if targeted as an actual children's tale, but I'm inclined never to buy into this argument. Fairy tales can be dark and ugly. Goody good, for all I care. So yeah, I enjoyed this on the whole.

After the Storm (Umi yori mo mada fukaku) (link), a relatively slow-paced and low-fi drama about a father who is trying to stay in touch with his son, against her ex-wife's hissy attitude towards him and plans to move on, while his own life is fairly unsatisfying and jumbled. There is simplicity in the narrative and some obvious allegories (the title, for instance, relates to a typhoon set to sweep the city, forcing the former family to have to stick together for a while), but I also thought the lead actor had a lot of gesture and expressive flair. This looked well made for a light drama, even if I don't have anything spectacular to note about it.
by Ricochet
Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:04 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

American Pastoral (link). This is one of two Philip Roth adaptations that both appeared last year and it was signaled that, while both have issues in adapting the source material, AP would count as the worse attempt. I wouldn't say it is a dud, but since Ewan McGregor took the helm of directing this after the original director quit, he has come up with fairly mundane results. Even the main acting trio of McGregor - Connelly - (Dakota) Fanning is pulling an honest, if unremarkable job. If you aren't familiar with the story (I haven't read the book myself yet), it concerns how a seemingly picture-perfect family's dissolution, once their rebellious, Electra-complexed-like daughter turns into a violent anti-Nam radical, mirrors the turmoil of 60s-70s America. Thing is, all this is presented lineary in the movie, which drew criticism that it misses the point of the book's less linear approach.

Christine (link), the dramatization of 70s TV reporter Christine Chubbuck, her struggles with depression and conflicts within her station, that led her to commit suicide on live air in July 1974. A secondary theme inadvertedly covered here is also the early stages of sensationalism in news media in their crave for ratings - something that, if it sounds more familiar, inspired, just two years after this incident, the movie Network. Now given that this movie was pretty much DOA during the awards season, you might get the impression it is a more modest creation, apart from the topic and lead performance, yet you might be surprised (as I was) how virtuosic and assured the activity and interactions inside the news station are covered and the acting is pretty bang up across the board (maybe just Timothy Simons irks me a little, since he seems to pull the same style anywhere). Rebecca Hall herself is excellent and not in a showy, big lettered "I'M ACTING SO MUCH" manner - in a way that I think her and Amy Adams (for Arrival, less so for Nocturnal Animals) have proven this year that it's possible, even if getting ZERO recognition in the process. Even the directorial angle doesn't seem to crave just for overdramatic moments, but to truly scoop as much as possible from the story and the interactions. Good stuff, for sure.

Kong: Skull Island (link). Happy to report best friendo was mighty pleased with this and that he also spilled half of his popcorn even before the movie started. As for me, the effects are in such state, that you cannot even be contrarian about them, while the rest is a compilation of poor overused tropes we've been used to all this time: mad scientist in search to find and capture da big beast (literally pick your movie), nature vs da bad human (Avatar), revenge-thirsty army man is the real enemy (Avatar again) or another creature is the real enemy (new Godzilla, with which this movie is now linked), plus some billboard lead faces that get sucked into this and are destined to edge out in the ensuing survival game. Tom Hiddleston brings his blandest mode and Brie Larson, bless her heart... either she trolled her part, due to how underwritten she realized she was, she was high or, worst possibility of them all, gave a dud of a performance. Plus, you'll know it when/if you see it, but John C. Reilly also stepped in to totally break the camel's back - although, at the same time, it also had a weird now-I-surely-can't-take-any-of-this-seriously levity to it. I wasn't disappointed or infuriated by any of this, to be honest. I just ate my nachos, disconnected my brain and went on my way after two hours.

Les Cowboys (link) - about as hardboiled and PC-free as an odd European/French western-like movie can come, about a daughter who runs from her family and converts into a Muslim, prompting her father and brother (the movie eventually splits the narrative into two halves, for each of them) to search for her and come into a culture clash with the Muslim minority. At times, there is no tiptoeing in this movie regarding how much friction there is in said culture clash. Apt performances, gritty occasionally, little room for melodra- oh my god another John C. Reilly cameo are you freaking kidding meeee.

Mediterranea (link), an immigrants movie that, back to back with the movie above, made for a weird combo of sharp, no-BS depictions of minority life and social rift in Europe. This movie is what Palme d'Or '15 winner Dheepan and Golden Bear '16 winner Fuocoammare could have been, if more focused in their drama and documentary sections, respectively, and less obvious in trying to milk some politically-relevant attention and awards concession. I thought this was a typical solid movie that you will just feel interested in or not, less go into polemics regarding its movie qualities.
by Ricochet
Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:50 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

So it seems I needed to trudge through about 50 movies, during two-three months worth of mostly 2016 movies to finally get to see some more interesting works. Too bad I watched most of the following with modest to very low attention span. But before I point them, there was...

Passengers (link) - I mean jesus, I had this intentionally running in the background and it still managed to draw grimaces from me. This is basically an either misguided, misconceived or just half-assed attempt of a love drama in space blockbuster, with two of perhaps the best known faces in Hollywood right now, Starlord (WHOOO) and JLaw. Don't know why Chris Pratt is pushed towards drama right now, because he surely couldn't sustain a near-solo performance during the first 30 minutes of this movie. And JLaw, I don't even know... it's not that I think she isn't a good actress, per se, but I've sort of lost belief in her craft for a long time now - and this movie again seems the perfect cheap, artificial, rigid medium in which she can limit herself. The chemistry between these two is pretty off, given the Titanic in Space allure it wants to give; the writing is bad; nothing truly interesting or exciting happens in the movie. The only tidbit that sparked interest about this movie was SPOILERS from now on if you haven't seen it, but you shouldn't see it so sorry not sorry about the moral choice Pratt makes that impacts JLaw's character (waking her up from her cryogenic sleep only so that he could have a companion, while sentencing her to the same lonely slow life he would be forced to experience) and how bizarrely, despite it all, the romance between these two is still pushed on. But seriously, I've written too much already about this one to launch into further debate... A movie you know will prove bad that still manages to tick you off is pretty much in a category of bad on its own.

Tanna (link), a movie shot on the eponymous island in Vanuatu with actual locals from the Yakel tribe, reenacting a true story about marriage customs and "heart vs tradition" conflicts. It's basically a sort of Romeo and Juliet, if rather Juliet and Romeo were in the same house, but the house would want to marry Juliet off to the other house. This was an Oscar Foreign nominee and, since I've now seen 4/5, I'd say it could rank second in preferences (I'm just not ready to drop my undying admiration for Farhadi's style of dramas). Then again, if you're fan of "indigenous kino", like say the recent Embrace of the Serpent or a bit older movie called Ten Canoes or documentary-drama duel flair of some Herzogian docuworks, you should very much enjoy this. I thought it struck a decent balance between authentic and heartfelt.

The Childhood of a Leader (link), an adaptation of Sartre's short story (part of his The Wall) and a debut directorial effort from Brady Corber, who might have been better known till now for his acting (Mysterious Skin, Funny Games, Simon Killer); one might say he proceeded with this to "steal" a bit of craft from directors he worked with such as Michael Haneke or Antonio Campos (previous week's Christine), since this seems a foremost stylish exercise, crafting a slow-paced, dark & brooding puritanical story about a child who will grow up, following a troubled childhood, to become an unnamed fascist leader (the parallels with history here are left unclear and irrelevant, the last portion of the movie wanting moreover to recreate a page out of 1984 more than anything else). But I called it a stylistic exercise - complete with a soundtrack from ya favorite DJ in da house SCOTT WALKER hello again - to highlight its diligent visual and artistic qualities, even if I have to admit the narrative might turn you away from calling it captivating.

Truman (link) or about the most straightforward heartfelt movie, about a terminally ill middle-aged man visited by his lifelong friend, just about when he contemplates "pulling the plug". Sounds somber and there is a typically Spanish looseness in, for instance, how said protagonist reflects on his plans or how humorous with bittersweet moments are combined during this bromantic reunion. And the movie seems both Almodovar super-light and typical mainstream dramedy, in a good way. Went on to sweep the Goyas, of course, two years ago.

And lastly, Under the Sun (link) which, whoa boy, I can barely wrap my head around how it was achieved. Technically, this was meant to be a propaganda movie, ordered by North Korean government, allowing a small Russian crew to film on location, except the Russian crew cheekily kept rolling past the intensely scripted and staged desired sequences, recorded it on a separate memory card and smuggled it out of the country. The result is pretty much the harsh reality we already knew about that country: everything is staged; every single part of their life is solid active brainwash. Both the most enlightening and harrowing parts of the movie are catching on the tape how the North Korean officials would insist on reshooting certain sequences, till everything looked spot on: down to the words people were saying, their degree of "comradery" and reverence towards the Great Leader(s) and so on. You'd definitely have to see it with your own eyes, but this is textbook cult of personality and propaganda coating, except on an infinitely cruder, heartless, life- and freedom-sapping level. Sure, this was probably bound to awaken my empathy levels, but I also thought it was a surprising, masterful execution overall.
by Ricochet
Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:38 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Needless to say, I did not have time for a full week of movie-watching and I also happen to have run out of fresh stuff to watch. If any of you reading this would like to recommend me some titles, new or old, feel free to do so.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

I did see, though, White Girl (link), a pretty grim, trashy and loose look into how a teenager hooks up with a drug dealer, only to then, in a weird sympathetic way, to go to serious lenghts (which, considering the world of cocaine, promiscuous partying and sex she's spiraled into, gets quite "serious" indeed) to bail him out. Morgan Saylor, who a few years ago played Dana (Brody's daughter) in Homeland, if anyone (still) remembers that (period of the) show, goes kinda all in with her investment in her performance, which is commendable. The movie is not really moderate on its sleazy, unsettling, depraved and at times near-explicit content and could remind movie-watchers of stuff like Heaven Knows What or any of Harmony Korine's edgy movies. One thing left to debate is whether, since this is created partly out of the director's own experiences, it entitles this loose, licentious depiction to be seen in a better light. I think it was a fine, daring movie.

Also watched The Fits (link), a neat, short indie experiment which nevertheless let me a bit in a "huh" mood. Story takes place almost entirely at a gym / sports club sort of thing, with the protagonist as a young tomboyish girl, who would rather work out and box with her brother and the rest of the boys than join the girl's dance troupe. There's a strong sense of genre-divided and genre-specific, with the only interactions between the sides being, of course, flirtatious - with the exception of this girl being drawn in to both worlds. Then strange stuff start happening and affecting the group, which is an obvious source of mystery and genre-escaping magic, reminding me heavily of another Brit psychostrange drama, The Falling (probably reviewed it, too, somewhere in this thread). Didn't like that one much, wasn't enamoured with this one either. One thing to note, though, is the soundtrack provided by the same duo who created the one for Villeneuve's Enemy, Danny Bensi & Saunder Jurriaans - it's very experimental and eerie for regular tastes in film scores, but ups the sensations and vibes throughout the movie very well.
by Ricochet
Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:44 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Last week, I managed to watch just one movie, which constituted my focus in more ways than that, namely Georg Wilhelm Pabst's silent movie from 1929 Die Büchse der Pandora (Pandora's Box) (link), which was also played at my Philharmonic with live music, a project in which I was involved in the orchestra. This is based on Frank Wedekind's two "Lulu" plays, about an amoral and libertine temptress who spins the mind of every man around her, until it leads to dire consequences - a movie that happens to predate another adaptation, which was Alban Berg's opera Lulu, a work I have yet to fully grasp, yet find myself rewatching/relistening often with twisted pleasure. This movie is perhaps also notable for rising lead actress Louise Brooks to fame. While the source material seems like the perfect match for a fin-de-siecle, expressionistic style, I think the movie strays from the sharp, gritty format of earlier German cinema, instead embracing elements of flowing, dynamic, intense melodrama, while still having a gothic vibe to it. The most tense and dramatic scenes are perhaps the greatest, in ways I'd only spoil them by talking in detail about their visuals and flow. I'd say this movie has elements of a classic. I'd also like to mention that I grew fond of the new score that was performed in concert, composed by Dominik Schuster, so much that at home I matched the "bootleg" from the live performance with the movie; it is a clean and compelling soundtrack, with qualities of a coherent symphonical work in itself, not just fragments tailored for the scenes it accompanies.
by Ricochet
Sun Apr 16, 2017 6:22 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Das Leben der Anderen (The Lives of Others) (link), the well known and acclaimed, Oscar Foreign winning drama about the former Stasi's methods of infiltrating and surveilling the life of artists and people in East Berlin - focusing in the movie, on one hand, on such an artist, a playwright, and his life partner, an actress, believed but unproven to harbour dissident feelings (or, better yet, which higher officials of the regime just want to try to find some dirt on) and, on the other hand, on the secret agents on the side of ... the wall. While political in nature and very serious in tone, its plot is also fairly romanticised, as the protagonist, the Stasi agent in charge of the surveilling, begins to experience a turnaround. This is considered a distinct cult movie among those with the subject rooted in life under the Soviet regime in East Berlin, following more lighthearted takes such as Good Bye, Lenin! - although other dramas such as The Tunnel shouldn't perhaps be ignored either. This is a movie you will either have seen already or will need to pick it up eventually, the way I finally did; there's no other way around it, I'd say. It has some style and manner to reach out to your heartstrings and empathy buttons - in which regard it did catch me by surprise (but I'm also prone to be distressed by any story of oppression and human injustice). It's been said the portrayal of secret service machinations and the burdening social atmosphere of those times is incredibly faithful - something probably coming from the personal experience of the director and even of some of the actors - but there was also noted criticism about casting in a better light the work and character of a Stasi agent, to which my thoughts will be put into spoilers - read further only if familiar with the movie:
Spoiler: show
While I agree there is cause for controversy in "making a hero out of a regime pawn", especially with Wiesler's early demeanor as an agent -
meticulous, scrupulous, staunchingly efficient, no-nonsense and idealist in his duty - I think the drama was scripted well enough to argue that a seed of dissent could have grown even in the heart of such an agent, in that it was not only his own infatuation and sympathy towards the actress, but also witnessing the sheer vainglory of his officials' intents and actions (whether the Minister of Culture or his superior) that proved enough for eventual disenchantment.

But on the other hand, I don't think the above matters too much, because the way I see it, Wiesler's actions didn't end up fully "heroic" one bit. In fact, they were quite tragic. There were at least two moments in which Wiesler's so-called "better judgment" led to worse, karma-like consequences: 1) when the playwright and his friends test out whether his flat is bugged and Wiesler choose not to report it, which in turn makes the playwright confident enough to become an over dissident (setting in motion all the troubles to follow) and 2) when he removes the typewriter from the apartment, yet the actress still ends up committing suicide. Both these instances managed to wreck me inside, especially given their highlight of a no-win scenario during those oppressive times.

Finally, I would like to note that, for all its quality drama and flow, the movie's "coda" felt a bit too saccharine and intent on creating closure on all levels.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (link) - it's pretty bad when you decide to watch a movie like this in a completely ironic way and non-committal mood and still it manages to irk you. This is basically J.K. Rowling's next idea and milking more millions out of the Harry Potter franchise (she contributed directly with the script here) and, in a way, its saving grace is that we get stuff set in the past, rather than any "Harry Potter forward in time, as an adult" nonsense. Eddie Reymayne continues to sport his extreme mumblecore, gestic-jerky act and Katherine Waterson either doesn't have too good of comedic chops or mishandles a fair bit a quirky, mousy role. The plot wants to be both lighthearted and insert elements of ominous, srs bzns danger and the imbalance of it is just something to facepalm yourself over. Let me know what was to truly like about this fan servicing, over-indulgent spin-off, because I sure couldn't detect.

Heart of a Dog (link) a documentary / art project made by musician Laurie Anderson, who is one of my favourite artists ever. As with mostly everything Anderson has done, it seems small in scope and oddball and... kooky in the way it's designed. Most of the times, it pans out the same way one of her albums would: filled with short, anecdotal, intertwined stories and musings. But the reward, also as always, is getting a sense of this artist's pure, emotional, philosophical perspective on both humane and spiritual aspects of life. The "documentary" side of this relates to the time spent with her terrier Lollabelle until she passed away, but if you know, for instance, that Anderson was married with Lou Reed, it's not hard to figure out that the movie ends up as a device for reflecting on dealing with loss, mortality, life reminiscences and treasured memories and such.

Sátántangó (link). My second time watching this 7-hour movie. What a beast. First time it was also on Holy Saturday, three years ago - which was in no way intended to relate to the Easter festivities, I just found myself being alone for the holiday and having the right amount of free time to attempt to watch it - and now it seems I'm keen to build it into a ritual.

Anyway, I have no real strength and impetus right now to sell you on why I believe this to be a masterpiece. It has, after all, some pretty outrageous elements that cannot be easily advocated towards a larger audience: it's seven hours long, it's a highlight of extremely slow cinema, with an intense mixture of long takes and minimalist action (or at times non-action) and it's supremely dark, depressing and desolate. But it is my personal belief that, if there is room in art for "the dark side", Bela Tarr is confidently ahead in line for me as the master of the pitch black. I've yet to expand past having seen this and The Turin Horse, but so far, I'll gladly watch him paint the apocalypse. In a way, he already has. There are scenes or entire chapters from this that will stick with me forever. If you could make room at least once during your lifetime for this kind of an experience, love it or hate it, I would say do it.
by Ricochet
Mon Jul 10, 2017 11:31 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I'm back into watching movies. Remember movies??

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

A Cure for Wellness (link) - a sprawling experience with this babyfrankenstein of a movie by Gore Verbinski (hard to recommend on his own, since he spent the last decade making Pirates of the Caribbeans movies and... The Lone Ranger). I guess the trailer signaled some interesting, eery aesthetics, but then the reviews were all a turn off, so I delayed watching it until now. There is an air of homage/pastiche towards old gothic fantasy horrors or even Verhoevean body horror - including an appropriately unsettling lead cast of sickly-/creepy-looking Dane DeHaan and Mia Goth - and it does have a good dose of unadulterated batshit ideas, still it's not a great movie. It's incredibly long, overbloated and honky in its plot events and, after a while, I even had on just half of the screen, with a sense of dullness. Also surprised this isn't adapted from some kind of bestseller or fantasy franchise, because it felt like it could be Twilight for goths and the background music was as cheesily fitting as coming out of a Harry Potter movie.

Before the Rain (link) - was supposed to watch this during my trip in Macedonia, but oh well. Probably the most popular Macedonian movie - though more of a British-French-Macedonian co-production - having one the Golden Lion and nominated at the Oscars, crafting an intertwined tryptich of stories about human violence, ethnic tensions in that country and other drama, with a particular storyline gimmick about people can influence each other under certain circumstances. But its serious themes are about the best thing I feel I could point out about it, the approach otherwise was seriously melodramatic.

Get Out (link) - well then, this was a fairly dank surprise, that I enjoyed more than I expected. I don't watch Key & Peele, so I'm judging the movie on its own and for the most part, it was nice and refreshing to see a smart, balanced, cheeky type of horror comedy. Steady build up, quality tension at times, a few good (but not gratuitous) spooks. Also obviously also a lot of tropes, stereotypes and racial comment either used or turned on their head. A few details and plot nodes were still tad predictable, but it didn't detract much from the viewing.

Les fils de Joseph (The Son of Joseph) (link) - what might likely be my favorite movie of the week is the one I feel less decided what to say about or even how good of a grade to color it in. Alas, this is how it usually goes with Eugene Green's movies, whose earlier work The Portuguese Nun I've listed here as among my unranked favorites of the 2000s. His aesthetic style is unwavering with each new movie - arthouse yet still mostly accessible to the viewer's understanding; dialogue-heavy "a la Eric Rohmer" but also aseptic, in a way that the actors are forced to carry these dialogues facing the camera in close-ups, with hardly any kind of organic exchange between each other; heavy very literate and subtle themes (whether it's religion, art, history), yet boiling down to small story theatrics; quirky, dry, light humor etc. As the title suggests, there is some biblical allegory (although it's curiously centered more on Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac), while the narrative is about a boy wanting to find out the identity of his father and instead ending up, unknowingly, to bond with his uncle. I'd still say there's no real way to sell or recommend Green's movies, unless you come to appreciate them on their own, but as a mere "connoiseur", I'd rank this below The Portuguese Nun, but above the movie before this one, La Sapienza.

Life (link) - finally, a really indulgent and dumb-thrills space horror, ripping off just about whatever it needs from the likes of Alien or Gravity. While its core theme may be promising enough - that our optimism in searching for or making contact with extraterestrial life should be more reserved - its execution boils down to a plain monster movie with a small cast stranded in space getting dunked on. Everything in terms of plot, spooks, tension, twists and such should count as predictable to any afficionado.
by Ricochet
Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:54 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Not much to report this week, apart from

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Agonie (Agony) (link) - a German-language debut by Paraguayan director David Clay Diaz, in which its main idea of a shocking climax is taken away (or it's rather intended as a deconstruction of the typical thriller / murder drama) by being spoiled in synopses (as seen on IMDb) and even at the beginning of the movie. What remains are two stories, mixed but not intersected, of young adults experiencing interior turmoil in different environments; sketched are the profiles of, on one hand, the reclusive intellectual student type, shot in minimalistic brushstrokes and implacably sparse dialogue and characterisation, and on the other hand, the broken home street punk type, whose scenes seem moreover appropriate to burst out of a Xavier Dolan movie or British slum tales. Neat experimentation overall with this dual montage, interesting and serious approach on the subject youthful frailness, plus the foreshadowed shocking even filmed as unflinching and visceral as possible - and yet, not too much to keep this movie in mind for long, either.

Lady Macbeth (link) - not an actual spin-off on the famous Shakespearean anti-heroine - technically an adaptation of Nikolay Leskov's Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District (every art buff would, at this point, point out Shostakovich to have written an opera based on it, plus this not even being the first movie adaptation, considering Andrzej Wajda's 1961 work) - still, set in a vague Victorian rural setting, in which a young woman (Florence Pugh) is forced (sold, even) into marriage, finding herself stranded and treated as a commodity inside the most patriarchal stuck-up ménage possible. This is initially the setting for a rather tame period piece, filled with Flaubertian ennui, but soon her desire for gaining status and for adulterous carnal sweet releases turns up the "macbethian" knob. There is considerable depth and finesse into highlighting the protagonist in both sympathetic and questionable light - empowered and blinded by her cunningness at the same time - or showing class differences even among the subservient (particular props to Naomi Ackie, as the coloured servant) and the performances are downright impetous (not the first time I watch Florence Pugh in a movie and she is a wild young force, for sure).
by Ricochet
Tue Aug 01, 2017 3:17 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Well I figured I'd wait until the end of the month to post some new reviews, so here it is

A (10)/A- (9) / B+ (8) / B (7) / B- (6) / C (5) / D (3-4) / F (1-2) / No rating

L'Odyssee (The Odyssey) (link) - bland and by-the-numbers biopic on legendary nature explorer and filmmaker Jacques Cousteau, the type of effigy building that is empty at its core about capturing the personality, also with the sinful ambition of covering as much of his significant lifespan as possible, from the ex-marine turning his diving passion into a business, his fight to manage, expand and maintain public and commercial interest, his marital and familial conflicts (particularly with one of his sons, who gets his own kind of B-story). For a French movie, the style is moreover trying to pander to Hollywood expectations and it's all very 101 in stereotypes and biopic tropes. I guess some of the wildlife shotmaking is good, but even that starts feeling NatGeo-ish, once in synergy with a schmaltz of a movie.

Logan (link) - a no doubt inspired, if still way overdue (considering how much they took their sweet time milking the image of the most iconic of X-Men into one shitty action movie after another) quality Wolverine solo movie, timing it with a proper send-off to Hugh Jackman. The austere superhero build (think you can actually count the full-grown mutants on one hand) and gritty R-rated action offer some liberties in regards to focusing on the story and rising the stakes; both Jackman's Wolvie and Stewart's Xavier are shown in their late, post-glorious, ailing phase, which allows to care more about them; plus the prodigy child character, while kinda sketched to bank on the same magnetic appeal as say Eleven from Stranger Things, has a buddy-up connection with Wolvie that works; the villans are corporate stock, but not annoying etc. etc. So technically there's a lot to like (the story, the meaningful action, the feels), yet I remain agnostic to the fact that one out of 10 capemovies working against the trend of Marvel's factory bland style or DC's spectacle of shooting itself in the face repeatedly is meant to earn instant praise. There's still a whole universe outside this capeuniverse, compared to which Logan, just like Guardians or Deadpool before that, still doesn't quite stack up to or is in any way perfect. The flow of the movie, for instance, is not devoid of predictable, not spectacularly new set pieces and I can't say the use of a "superior Wolverine clone" trope as an element of tension, danger and "underdoggery" blew me away.

Lu bian ye can (Kaili Blues) (link) - not much I can say about this right now, on account of having done a poor watching of it. On surface level, seemed like the kind of lo-fi, plot-light, slow 'n' pensive arthouse, plus I remember having had an impressive 30-minute or so long take. So good chops for a debut, but I just wasn't in an attentive mood that evening.

Notes on Blindness (link) - what could have easily been a biopic or even an interview slash album photos doc is instead a documentary that uses theologian John Hull's audio diaries on his blindness and converts them in recreated scenes using actors. A delicately modeled, stylistically lavish movie, heavy on musings and recollections from which the core message is trying to actively understand your life as an existential mechanism.

Okja (link) - UGH. Bong Joon-ho is an acclaimed director of Korean horror (Mother, The Host), but once he transitioned to English mainstream movies, I still consider him to be struggling in producing a levelheaded work out of his bonker, outlandish ideas. Did not join the hype wagon with the Oldboy meets Orwell meets Matrix pastiche that was Snowpiercer and I feel even worse about this one. In essence, it's meant to be a sharp satire on ecological woes and Western corporations, but the end product is risibly off the wall. Thing is, it could have been an idyllic, funny, exciting and moralizing movie - heck, in small doses, it even is - but it's almost like it went for deliberately retarded instead. Tilda Swinton does an only-for-fanboys role, just like in Snowpiercer and Jake Gyllenhaal puts on the most absurd, imbecilic comedic hat, a role that I think even Rob Schneider would have had the dignity to pass. Also notable that this is the movie that stirred controversy at Cannes over the eligibility of Netflix screenings, but I couldn't care less now considering that its content doesn't hold up to its merits.

Lovesong (link) - as the title suggests, a simple kind of indie vignette in which a young mother (Riley Keough), whose own marriage becomes strained, almost becomes involved in a relationship with her best friend (Jena Malone). Years later, as her friend is getting married, their reuniting also becomes an occasion to reconcile with what could have been or even what might still be between them. Soft-spoken, emotionally charged framing and performances, but ech, nothing particularly special.

Sieranevada (link) - meanwhile on the Romanian front, nothing new, as New Wave eminence Cristi Puiu goes as deep and implacable as always with his hyper-realistic ways, trying to capture for nearly three hours the "nothing-happens-ness" of a family gathering in an apartment to commemorate the recent passing of the protagonist's father. Of course, aside from the technical goals for minimalistic, long-take shotmaking and seamless, incredible montage within a small, crammed space for filming (all achieved with excellence), Puiu's ambition must certainly be to create a fresco of family and human interactions. To us, it hits very much home to see these scenes of randomness, small talk and animosities at a family gathering - for the rest of the world, though, idk; I suppose it could appeal to American fans of Osage County? Anyway, I've dreaded a bit to actually watch this movie - it created, as expected, an even bigger rift between critics who lick it with praise for its utter big-lettered Cinema and those who are fed up with New Wave's incorrigible style and thus mocked it as "three hours of waiting for the pastor to arrive, so the family can have the memorial service and then finally sit down to eat borscht". At Cannes, the reviews were positive, but the jury ultimately went with some laurels towards Mungiu's Graduation, although I think this one is somewhat better. Its screening time did not prove such an issue, the three hours flew by and at times I was genuinely amused or enchanted by this bitter comedy of manners.

Sobache serdtse (Heart of a Dog) (link) - a TV two-part adaptation of one of Bulgakov's novels. As a moderate fan of Bulgakov's anti-bolshevic satirical works (Master and Margaret, Fatal Eggs), I found the style both recognizable and a bit too plainly transposed on screen - though some credit to the acting, to the old movie sense of sepia-tinged visuals and especially to finding a dog who can act depressed.

Split (link) - well then, dare we hope for an "M. Night Shayamalanaissace", as this is his first decent movie in fucking forever? The movie's premise remains wacky and precarious to handle, having "batshit" and "exploitative" written all over it, as James McAvoy plays a man with 23 split personalities who abducts three female teenagers as an offering for an emerging dark, ominous 24th personality. And yet the movie is solid enough, McAvoy carries the movie's difficulty and prevents it from plunging into derision (he doesn't perform all 23 splits, don't worry) and I have to credit Anya Taylor-Joy as well, who follows up her role in The VVitch with the same mix of pure and troubled horror damsel aura. Not bereft of some clunk in its treatment of mental dysfunction or in some flashbacks serving as blunt exposition and has a "tweeeest" that links the movie with a previous Shyamalan (good) oeuvre, but still, well beyond decent - which is saying something, in this case.

T2 Trainspotting (link) - also on the "colour me impressed, this didn't suck" list, Danny Boyle's sequel to his cult, magnificent (at least IMO) 90s movie. Not that the world desperately needed a Trainspotting 2 - then again, there was pre-existing material for this, as Irvine Welsh has a taste for sequels himself (what I'm saying is that this movie adapts his book Porno in some degree). Boyle applies his usual modern-day style, much like you might have seen on Slumdog Millionaire or Trance, especially with the fast-paced dialogue and zappy montage. Not an essential, relevant movie by any movies, but still a nice view on the characters returning 20 years later to muse on their aging life, following their fucked-up teenage days. Some of the slur-heavy, Scot-argotic humor holds up about as hysterically well as on the original, too.

Dunkirk (link) - so bona fide Nolan-esque, it was both going to be hard to disappoint and yet there's room for letting you down a bit. Mainly it's the thing that I'm not sure Nolan can evolve past his incessant, ever-recurring tropes anymore (whether it's his fascination with time, his desire to create smart-mode blockbusters, his orchestral vision and large-scale meticulousness etc.). Somehow the Dunkirk subject was meant to fit like a glove on his approach (plus a chance for him to finally go back to making a bloody British movie), the only unique opportunity being for him to ease up on any Sci-Fi mindfuckery and hamfisted themes such as "love is the driving force of everything" - which he complies with, to the point of sacrificing any deep characterization (the Private-Ryan-esque aim to empathise with your heroes' struggles and goals) for a technically masterful and aptly grandiose depiction of war. So as a symphony of filmic structure, sprinkled with attention to historical fidelity, Dunkirk is a safe accomplishment. Like Jay argued, I'm not sure myself if we needed or not another war movie - I'll add I never went in with the expectation of Nolan delivering the never-seen before, ultimate war movie experience. I'm even less concerned with how Dunkirk stacks up, considering I'm usually sold by Nolan's cinematic wizardry when watching it on the big theatre screen, but then feel gradually worse once time passes and I process it more - same thing happened with Interstellar and nowadays I can no longer rewatch that one with a straight face, tbh. And Dunkirk itself did not end without any penalty either. I for one was slightly irked by the explicit mention of the three timelines' duration - it's not like Nolan cared about that when fucking with our brains in Inception and Interstellar - though I get it that it's grounded in reality (the army was stranded for a week, the civilian boats took a day to carry rescue trips and RAF Spitfires could only carry hour-long missions). Plus, by the time all the themes in this "symphony" converge in the third act, one might well be struck, depending on their acquired knowledge of previous works, by either the familiarity or annoyance of Nolan's frame-swapping non-linearity. Still, this movie is Nolanesque through and through. But it is so both in good and ech ways.

The Bad Batch (link) - alas, I must conclude this briefing, as I conclude my month in movies, with quite a stinker. This is the second movie by Ana Lily Amirpour, who wowed indy audiences with her vampire glossy-shick debut A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (that failed to impress me, however) and now seemingly wanted to flex her "I'd be able to direct a Mad Max sequel" muscles with a dystopian, Texan wasteland gritty story filled with canibals, damaged people and dog-eat-dog surviving skills. At first, the movie wastes little time with exposition or social commntary, lauching us straight into the feral setting and for a good 20 minutes it seems to go unflinchingly brutal and dark. But then it gets bogged down by stuff like introducing a carnaval-like cornucopia community, in which everyone is damaged good and Keanu Reeves plays a spiritual patriarch bullshitter, plus Jim freaking Carrey is a silent wacky roamer - the plot gets erratic and undecided between badland dystopia, Kill Bill-esque revenge story and Stockholm syndrome tinged weird-ass romance; the pacing becomes atrocious; all the performances are unconvincing or forcedly bonkers. It's sad and strange, but this was by far the hardest watch I had to sit through all month.
by Ricochet
Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:04 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Carol and Safe have nothing in common. More like Carol and Far from Heaven.
Place Beyond was turd.
by Ricochet
Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:32 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

I haven't watched any new movies while on holiday.
by Ricochet
Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:57 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

G-Man wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:13 pm I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
Why for me? I skipped past all the, ahem, plot development, anyway. :grin:
by Ricochet
Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:46 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
by Ricochet
Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:47 pm
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

G-Man wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:21 pm
Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:57 pm
G-Man wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:13 pm I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
Why for me? I skipped past all the, ahem, plot development, anyway. :grin:
Because you griped about me not sharing my thoughts on movies I've been watching in Discord last week.
Ah. Well, that does remain a valid complaint.
by Ricochet
Sat Aug 26, 2017 3:41 am
Forum: Tinsel Town
Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen
Replies: 274
Views: 31687

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

Epignosis wrote: Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:37 am
Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:46 pm Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
Spoiler: show
I believe with all my heart that people suffer from "The previous version is better than this one" sickness.

While I do believe the anime was superior to the Netflix film, I think the Netflix film did a lot of things right. For one, they showed Light as a self-centered KID. Yes, a kid who "makes so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless move within his first two kills." To me, that makes sense. He's a smart math kid, but stupid when it comes to the Death Note. That said, I liked his first few kills. They made sense within the framework of American culture.

I don't understand your complaints about apples or candy. How are they "treated like a meme?" How would you do them differently as a filmmaker? The apples and candy shots, in my opinion, were better than the anime. I don't need to see Ryuk sucking apple cores to get that he likes apples. This movie did it with fun and a nod. That's all you need.

The CGI on Ryuk was fine and I liked how he wasn't the center of attention with his "glorious full detail." This isn't a cartoon. He was also an asshole instead of a friendly character. I liked that too.

My disagreements end there.

I loved "Dr. Strange" from Gotham playing Watari, but I agree with Rico here: Watari isn't his real name, so what the hell?

Yes, this is inferior to the anime, but I believe if this movie had come out first, a lot of people would call the anime garbage. That's how we are a lot of the times. I felt this was a good movie with a few distinct weaknesses.
Well that was me in simple fanboy rant mode more than pertinent criticism, but I can go more in depth, I suppose.
Spoiler: show

Well, I believe with all my heart that the American film industry suffers from the "let's crap out a movie (or adaptation) out of everything popular, with half-assed effort put into it" syndrome.

Among the things that I can mention to have actually liked would me Mia. Faint praise in the overall context, but I feel she struck the right note of crazy-eyed, psychotic, overly attached and yet even potentially duplicitous character. Plus, while I'm sure the actress was overall selected for her natural mix (at least from the previous shows I've seen her in) of cheerleader looks, sass and sarcasm, the other stuff wasn't quite in her usual range, so that's already someone who visibly went into her character.

The other thing would probably be the gore. Not something the anime had full liberty to do, up to a point, but here at least it had a splashy, trashy, Final Destination-like quality. I'm convinced the budget went more into the blood splatters, while the Ryuk one stopped at making him look like a Gremlin.

"Self-centered" is a fairly weak descriptor to want or applaud for being achieved, because to an extent, absolutely every main character in this story is "self-centered". One big theme proposed by Death Note is that there is less heroism to talk about and more what means people will take to have it their way on the grand chessboard of life and morality; that there is no big-lettered one Justice, only justice seen through the eyes of many, who want to impose it as the right one.

Digression-aside, while I understand that Yagami Light is a Japanese anime version of a "genius kid developing a God complex", an avatar that tests plausibility plenty of times, Light Turner is just... idk, geek emo? I think Light Turner being "stupid when it comes to the Death Note" is deeply problematic instead of anything close to satisfying. Why would anyone want a Light who's bad at using the Death Note?! At a basic level, Yagami Light being competent, skillful, intelligent and focused with his actions surrounding the Death Note should be a desirable element of the show. I do not for a second believe that the expectation for this movie from any Death Note fan should be for Light to do something that could, under normal circumstances, lead back to him in two-three moves. Yagami Light being tested and put under great pressure time and again was immense fun in the anime. Light Turner having his dad come up to him after it's time for the movie to end and say "hey kid I just realized you went through my stuff to get your mother's murderer killed under strange, comical circumstances"? Ech.

I can also agree in principle with what you've said about part of the narrative fitting the American cultural frame, but I think that's also a problem in itself. Yagami Light required no major premise to set the events in motion. For all we know, he was a prodigious student and handsome, popular kid in the public eye that nevertheless felt empty, lonely and... "bored" inside. Roll things from there. I think the "American" mindset took that last part and developed it into "oh, Light Turner has to be a high-school loner, doesn't he? There just has to be a bully somewhere to fuel his rage, doesn't it? We just have to make him a half-orphan, to establish clear motive for one of his early kills, right?". Ech.

By "treating things like a meme", I meant treating any clear throwback or token from the lore as just that. "Showing the lightsaber just because." There is no real depth in showing an apple being snatched somewhere from darkness and then spit out half-chomped, only evasiveness (perhaps from technical shortcomings, which I believe in since I find Ryuk's aspect to be so half-assed) and shallowness in style. It's like that "jump scares in horrors need to come from seconds of silence and uncertainty, followed by a loud bang and jump" trope used 99% of times. Ryuk eating apples meant, in itself, nothing. Ryuk loving apples meant a lot. This is used in the movie with about as much depth as you having posted an image of apples and then a sketch of Ryuk in the Birthday thread.

Furthermore, my point was not about Ryuk being center of attention, but of there being no need to mask, blur his appearance or use the shallow "spooky" method in portraying him. It's just a cheap effect pertaining to American cinema's understanding of introducing a monster or weird character. I also get the idea of shaking things up and having Ryuk as an asshole rather than a sidekick, but I feel that's just moving from one wrong extreme to the next. There were layers upon layers into Ryuk's alien, neutral-stanced, yet humanised character. Netflix's Ryuk is just... "cackling asshole". Ech.

Look, I obviously don't mean to imply that I wanted or expected 37 episodes of mindgames, procedurals and slow-burning developments to be crammed into a 90-minute adaptation. There's a clear cartoon side of Death Note that does not need to be reflected in a live-action version, but there are also very potent themes and delectable stand offs between its iconic characters that I would have liked to get at least a whiff of in here as well. Did any of the "confrontations" between L and Light feel exciting? The one in the bar, at least, ended up giving me a headache.

I think all the "right things", the "vibes gotten right" from the movie can be mostly attributed to being taken from the anime source itself. Take the "had the movie come out first" idea and, as a standalone movie, this Death Note would have nearly no plausible, well-paced character development for anyone. L least of all. All his right, slick detective moves are borrowed directly from the anime - no standalone creative effort from the moviemakers there - while the rest is superficial and, in the end, he also mentally caves at the first sign of great stress (which is furthermore developed based on / fueled by a completely NONsensical premise of Watari being compromisable via the Death Note). Is that a more human characterisation than an anime-avatar one? Sure. But it's wrong, since in this instance, it doesn't stand for who or what L should represent. L in this movie is the very definition of adaptation by pandering to the memetic traits that stem from a well-known source. "Have him squat on a chair a bit, munch candy, talk about how sleep is overrated, hold a paper by the tip of fingers, mumble and twerk with his lips aaaaaand that's a wrap. Great job everybody, coffee break!" There's nothing that feels natural about this adaptation of L.

Finally, I'd like to disagree with your final supposition on anime vs movie because A) let's be real, there are less notable instances of anime adaptations of cult live action products, while the other way around, you have an movie industry beyond gluttonous for such pandering take-overs and B) had these two products come out in reverse order, but with the same content and quality in them, the anime would still be a deep(er), thoughtfully made show, making me doubt it would have been shot down simply because "oh mah god, it's nothing alike the movie, reeeeeee-".

Is it wrong for this movie to have gone for a "moody kids fool around as demi-gods of death, while chased by a weird-ass edgy (if sloppy at times) detective" approach? Of course not. It's why I didn't say it was a "travesty" in its treatment of the source. Still, doesn't mean I like it.

Return to “Rate the last movie you've seen”