Rate the last movie you've seen

#101

So I'm incredibly movie illiterate, but I'm slowly trying to change that. Finally watched The Sting the other day. I can see why it's considered a classic. Not mindblowing, but thoroughly enjoyable in every regard. I'd say it's at least an 8.5 out of 10.

#102

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.

#103

The Good Night - 6/10 Has a heap of good people in it.

The Mignight Swim - 8/10 - genre-bending character story with delicious supernatural undertones. I'm now obsessed with it!

Train to Busan - 8/10 - tantalizingly Korean. Basically Zombie Strangers on a Train. Super intense tension.

#104

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.

#105

Finally saw Girl on the Train. It's atmospheric, has good acting all around and adapts the book's structure well enough for film. My enjoyment was probably hampered by having read the book first, so nothing came as a surprise to me and I was waiting for the inevitable. Still, I can't fault the writing or editing for that, so I'd give it 8/10.

#106

I saw the Founder on Saturday. I intend to write a detailed review of it tomorrow, but I liked it. It was refreshingly complex and defies a one-sided interpretation.

#107

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.

#108

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.

8/10 is pretty high and quite the opposite of something you don't think you enjoying as much as you should have k.

I'd say 7/10 and I enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed the book.

#109

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.

#110

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.

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.

#111

Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.

#112

thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.

Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?

#113

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.

#114

Golden wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?

Javert's whole deal is that he has been brought up to believe that the law is everything. Absolute enforcement of the law is the only moral good. If you break the law, you are bad and must be punished. No exceptions. The amazing conflict in the character comes when his experience with Jean Valjean is utterly irreconcilable with this view. The man who is so unambiguously noble and good, who is willing to sacrifice himself to save others, who spares Javert's life when he has the opportunity even though he has spent most of his life being pursued and persecuted by him, presents a shattering conflict with his entire worldview. He can't handle that, and it ultimately destroys him. Javert is not an evil villain, but someone who has spent his entire life pursuing what he believes is the ultimate good, only to be forced to recognize that he may have been wrong.

I can't remember all the details of Crowe's performance. It's been a while since I saw the movie. But one scene in particular I thought was indefensible. Javert witness the death of the young boy Gavroche in the revolution, and sheds a tear for the lad. This was apparently added at the insistence of Crowe, not the screenwriter, and it's completely out of character. Javert would have had no sympathy for a revolutionary killed defying the law. He would have regarded the outcome as just and right. That Crowe wanted to add that to make the character more sympathetic indicates to me thta he missed the whole point.

#115

I should add that I regard Javert as one of the greatest, most interesting characters in all fiction, so I was perhaps more invested in the portrayal than I otherwise would have been.

#116

thellama73 wrote:
Golden wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?
Javert's whole deal is that he has been brought up to believe that the law is everything. Absolute enforcement of the law is the only moral good. If you break the law, you are bad and must be punished. No exceptions. The amazing conflict in the character comes when his experience with Jean Valjean is utterly irreconcilable with this view. The man who is so unambiguously noble and good, who is willing to sacrifice himself to save others, who spares Javert's life when he has the opportunity even though he has spent most of his life being pursued and persecuted by him, presents a shattering conflict with his entire worldview. He can't handle that, and it ultimately destroys him. Javert is not an evil villain, but someone who has spent his entire life pursuing what he believes is the ultimate good, only to be forced to recognize that he may have been wrong.

This is exactly what I felt Crowe portrayed incredibly well. Interesting how we have such different views of his performance.

Take your point on the tear for Gavroche, though. But I have no problem with Javert shedding a tear for what he sees as senseless criminality and people even bringing children into a life of rebellion - a tear for the failings of humanity, rather than sympathy for the individual.

#117

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.

#118

Last movie I saw was Rogue One. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5, which is the same score I gave to The Force Awakens (though they each arrived at that score for different reasons).

As for Les Mis, it's my wife's favorite musical and I thought I was taking one for the team by going to see it with her but it was great. Hugh Jackman gave the performance of his career and deserved the Oscar. But no, the Academy loves Daniel Day Lewis and his selectivity. Lincoln was lukewarm Oscar bait and DDL winning was their way to make the Academy look like it cared about social issues.

Anyway, I too felt that Javert was under-developed. He came across as the flattest of the main characters, which is not something you want in a good antagonist. That and Crowe was the worst singer in the lot for me. A song or two and some scowls wasn't enough to convey the conflict he was feeling.

#119

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.

#120

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?

#121

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.

#122

Just saw Arrival last night. Loved it! I guess I'd rate it a 9/10.

#123

Also wanted to say that as a movie novice, I enjoy your movie reviews, Rico. Keep it up!

#124

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 >:(

#125

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 >:(

Sweet, thanks for the recommendation! I'll have to do that. Arrival was just freaking awesome.

#126

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.

#127

Ricochet wrote:
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.

I'm definitely intrigued.

#128

Ricochet wrote:
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.

IMPROMPTU DENIS VILLENEUVE RANKINGS:

1. Enemy
2. Arrival
3. Polytechnique
4. Prisoners
5. Sicario
6. Incendies

#129

Enemy > Sicario > Incendies > Arrival > Prisoners

Polytechnique and the rest are ?? at the moment

#130

Prisoners for me is mostly memorable for Paul Dano's performance.

#131

MovingPictures07 wrote:Just saw Arrival last night. Loved it! I guess I'd rate it a 9/10.

*estimates approximately 2.3 months before MP's RYM page starts to show film ratings*

#132

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

Is that still happening?

#133

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

Is that still happening?

Yeah, the three-pronged site is still supposed to happen eventually. It was originally due last year, but something or another got in the way. Hopefully it's soon; it's kind of becoming an inside joke at this point.

It'll be:

Sonemic for music
Cinemos for films
Glitchwave for video/computer games

All three are separate but also intertwined, and the transition will be seamless for everyone's profiles. Whenever it happens.

#134

I just use Letterboxd instead

#135

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.

#136

My wife and I hit Redbox for Sully last night. Very good movie but the sound mixing was dreadful at times. I like hearing the scripted dialog. Sue me.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #137

Just saw Hidden Figures, it was fantastic.

#138

I saw A Cure for Wellness and Fist Fight. Thoroughly enjoyed both of them.

#139

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.

#140

nutella wrote:Just saw Hidden Figures, it was fantastic.

Same here. The stupidity of the human race is sometimes frankly unfathomable and I'd like to think that we as a race have come a long way since 1961 but I find myself constantly reminded just how far we have to go. Still, this was a brilliant movie. The storyline was interesting, the acting was very good. 8/10 from me.

#141

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.

#142

Logan is one of the best Comic Book films of all time. A damn sight better than the previous Wolverine/X-Men films, and in ways better than most Marvel movies. I actually cried when watching it, so there ya go. People need to win awards for this movie.

#143

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.

#144

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.

#145

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.

#146

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.

#147

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

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.

#148

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.

#149

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).

#150

Watched the new Spider Man a while ago.

Probably the best spider man film until now. Maybe others have better plot of something, but boy this film was so FUN. It really captured the magic of the underdog teenage superhero that barely kows what to do, and learns through adversity and creativity. And it was hilarious, from start to end.

Also had a pretty good villain for MCU standards.