Watched on Saturday December 14, 2024.
]]>
6.5
Blu Ray (88 Films)
Not quite on the same level as the director's wonderful RIKI-OH, all the same THE SEVENTH CURSE is a fun time, combining high-kickin' martial arts action and squelchy body horror with a ludicrous, nonsensical plot and a ton of unnecessary, gratuitous female nudity. It also features Chow Yun-Fat smoking a pipe near continuously and firing a rocket launcher, Maggie Cheung as a spunky journalist and a lengthy final action sequences in which a monster which looks like the Xenomorph in ALIEN fights a monster which looks like the baby in ERASERHEAD. It's a weird, crude and deeply silly film, but it looks great, the special effects are fun and the short runtime zips by.
]]>
6.5
Blu Ray
James McAvoy is on monstrously good form as the bad guy in this tense well-made psychological horror-thriller remake. The film retains the same themes as the original of threatened, frustrated masculinity and the death-wish meekness of the middle classes; it also offers bleak social commentary (straying almost into satire at times-- this is definitely a dark comedy) about just how far people will go, just how many micro-aggressions-- hell, aggression-aggressions-- people will ignore in order to avoid looking rude or ungrateful, to avoid transgressing societal norms of politeness and civility, even when the truth is staring at them and their family in the face with McAvoyian psycho eyes. The third act is, however, entirely different from the original-- could not be more different, in fact, and offers a fascinatingly stark contrast between dark, uncompromising auteur Euro-horror in the Haneke mould on the one hand, and on the other Western-made populist popcorn horror. To this end, the remake ends up pulling its punches in a third act which, whilst brilliantly executed, feels like almost every generic action-horror movie made since STRAW DOGS. I would note that I am not necessarily a huge fan of the sickeningly nihilistic ending of the original either, so I didn't necessarily mind the changes as much as others seem to have, but I do feel like there was a midway point between "the world is shit and cruel everyone is awful" and "hurray for our brave heroes!". All the same-- highly enjoyable stuff.
]]>
Watched on Friday December 13, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Thursday December 12, 2024.
]]>
7.5
Channel4
A super interesting, largely overlooked 'cannibals but set in the old-timey American West' film featuring a fascinating blend of genres-- Western, action-adventure, horror-- and two great central performances from Guy Pearce and Robert Carlyle as two dudes rolling around wintry forests trying to eat/not eat each other. It is pretty bonkers in conception, but thr tone is largely self-serious, which actually works pretty well and gives the film a muscularity and sense of dread, similar a more recent cannibal film, RAW, which I think must have been at least a bit inspired by this. There is also an interesting use of cannibalism-- and the insatiable, unquenchable hunger that this unleashes-- as a critique of Manifest Destiny. The biggest attraction of RAVENOUS, though, is the off-kilter, discordant score-- co-written by Damon Albarn of Blur and Gorillaz frame-- which is just incredible and gives the film a sense of almost surrealist delirium that helps it rise above what might otherwise have been B-movie genre territory. Highly recommend this one!
]]>
7
Amazon Prime Video (Rental)
An effortlessly charismatic, twinkly-eyed Kevin Kline does his best James Stewart impersonation in this gently satirical, Capra-esque political comedy-drama from Ivan Reitman. The MR SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON 'what if an honest, ordinary American everyman went into politics?' vibes are strong-- albeit packaged with a distinctly 90s zany concept, with Kline's titular character becoming President because the real President (also Kline) has a massive stroke whilst Dave is doubling for him. Reitman uses Dave's straight-talking, honest wholesomeness to compare against the ambition, cynicism, dishonesty and greed of the political operatives (exemplified by a suitably evil Frank Langella in particular) into whose world he thrust into. Made after the nihilistic, misanthropic political films of the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate era (such as THE CANDIDATE and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN) but before the modern era of nihilistic, misanthropic political television exemplified by THE THICK OF IT and VEEP, DAVE is without doubt a film that could only have been produced in the more positive 90s. The satire is definitely there, but it is very mild; overall, the film is almost relentlessly positive, emphasising the importance of honesty, respect, integrity and human decency in the political system. It posits that with hard work and good humour, there are no problems that cannot be solved. This can, of course, be easily dismissed in today's political culture as ridiculously naive and simplistic, but to do so is to give in to the very cynicism that DAVE decries; like Capra's MR SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON (though I think that film is a good deal more hard-hitting than DAVE overall), it envisages a world in which the democratic system is essentially a Good Thing; whilst can be twisted to evil ends by individuals, it is equally possible for good, honest, decent people to use it for good. Ultimately, DAVE sets out the world as we would want it to be, rather than as it is. The whole thing is held together by Kline, in possibly his best performance outside of A FISH CALLED WANDA: he is the very embodiment of human decency, but never allows things to tip over into mawkishness. Signourney Weaver has a less interesting role as the First Lady, though she still manages to bring class and dignity to the proceedings. Charles Grodin, Ving Rhames and Ben Kingsley all pop up in small but well-cast supporting roles. Overall, DAVE is not a film to go for if you are looking for acerbic socio-political commentary on the state of American democracy-- but if you are looking for a simple, gently moving story about how politics should work, shot through with a distinctly 90s goofiness, you could do far worse than this.
]]>
5.5
Disney+
Not a total disaster-- this is a solid, fairly faithful adaptation of the classic Dickens story; and if you ignore the human characters, the backdrops and general make-up of the digital world is, I think, pretty well done. However it is the case that the human characters are pretty uncanny valley at best and at worst just plain goddamn WEIRD. Scrooge looks pretty okay, but Colin Firth's character looks like an overly shiny, fun-house mirror, nightmare-fuel version of Colin Firth... Gary Oldman, on the other hand, is almost unrecognisable and weirdly proportioned... same for Bob Hoskins... the thing is that this might all work if Zemeckis leant into the weirdness a bit more, but A CHRISTMAS CAROL's biggest failing is, arguably, its po-faced seriousness. This is exemplified by Jim Carrey who, a handful of scenes where he is allowed to be silly aside, seems to be trying very hard for Respectful Gravitas, and it doesn't ever quite work. This is especially the case when he is also trying to do accents, such as Irish (Ghost of Christmas Past, who incidentally is such a surreal lil freak in this) and, most incredibly, Yorkshire (Ghost of Christmas Present). There are a handful of decent action sequences-- the bit where Scrooge shrinks down the mouse-size whilst being pursued is especially effective and a good use of the mo-cap tech. But overall this is a bit of an unfortunate mess, Zemeckis uncertain whether he wants to do serious adaptation or tech demo.
]]>
Watched on Sunday December 8, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Saturday December 7, 2024.
]]>
7
Blu Ray
Follows in the footsteps of similar recent coming-of-agers, with its episodic hangout vibes, nostalgic period detail and, perhaps most importantly, acceptance of the fact that being a teenager means being an absolute dickhead most of the time. To this end, like the likes of EIGHTH GRADE, THE EDGE OF SEVENTEEN, LADY BIRD, MID-90s, SNACK SHACK et al, the warm and charming DIDI focuses on the classic mid-teens experience: the freedom/boredom of the summer holidays; falling out with your siblings/parents/friends; the first tentative, awkward attempts at romance. It won't be anything you haven't seen before, although DIDI is well worth a look: firstly because of the issues of first-generation immigrant identity that it beautifully and sensitively explores; and secondly because the period detail is so specific and will absolutely hit hard for anyone who came of age during the MySpace/AOL Messenger/early Facebook era: a time of (relative) innocence. The details are the thing here, from the evocative use of music (Paramore! Motion City Soundtrack) even down to tiny things like the chime on the AOL Messenger and the stupid Top 8 Friends feature on MySpace, both of which are used here as integral elements of the plot. The film also nails the malleability of teenhood: Chris is essentially a blank slate, trying to fit into whatever other people are doing but without any fixed ideals, interests or opinions of his own. This sometimes works against the film-- it is sometimes hard to root for a kid who has never heard of Yoda!!-- but it seems to me to be representative of most kids. Anyway, DIDI isn't anything groundbreaking but it is a gently moving and surprisingly relatable watch-- especially if you grew up in the mid to late 00s!
]]>
7
4K Blu Ray
I don't feel like I necessarily need any more of these films, but DAY ONE is still a pretty good time. Lupita Nyong'o-- whose Oscar snub for her incredible dual performance in US remains something I am bitter about to this day-- continues to be one of the best actresses currently working, and she is immaculately cast here considering how much of the film is silent, horrified reaction shots, which she is insanely good at. Joseph Quinn is pretty decent as well. But it is of course the gorgeous cats who play Frodo who are the true stars of the show. Frodo is just the chillest, coolest animal in cinema history and it works so beautifully in the film's favour by providing a calming, grounded presence and avoiding the temptation to use Frodo as merely a plot device or point of conflict. The CGI on the monsters continues to look great and genuinely scary. The action scenes are well done. The ending is great. I had a good time with DAY ONE. But I'm not totally sure it quite justifies its existence-- do we learn anything fundamental about this world that we didn't learn from the first two? Does DAY ONE do anything different in terms of the action sequences? Probably not: we've seen this type of quiet-quiet-BANG sci-fi action plenty of times before, not just in the previous A QUIET PLACE films but also in WAR OF THE WORLDS and even SIGNS. But outside of this, PIG director Michael Sarnoski delivers a welcome focus on character and human tragedy and resilience-- this is after all at its heart a rather moving film about two broken people searching in vain for the perfect New York pizza. Also there are aliens attacking them. And there's an adorable cat! Overall it kinda works! But I don't need more of these.
]]>
5
Plex
Treated as a special effects masterclass, MEMOIRS OF AN INVISIBLE MAN is absolutely stellar, boasting some of the finest visual effects of the 90s. Seriously, the effects look almost flawless, even viewed today.
As an actual film, however, it is a huge mess.
The main issue with MEMOIRS is that it fundamentally doesn't know what kind of tone it wants to strike, and as a results ends up being kind of unsatisfactory in all regards. On the one hand you have Chevy Chase doing the Chevy Chase slapstick comedy thing; on the other you have a more serious, cod-philosophical treatise on what it would actually mean to be literally (and possibly metaphorically) invisible in society; there's a horror aspect more in line with the tone of the 30s Universal horror original (Chase's line about how he can't sleep because he can see through his own eyelids is surprisingly haunting); and then, somewhere in amongst that, you have a narrative that essentially replicates the 'innocent person on the run from a shady government department' template which is the basis for everything from E.T. to Carpenter's own STARMAN.
It is quite possible that a combination of the right director, the perfect star and a great screenplay could thread the needle on the above (I would say that GROUNDHOG DAY is an example of exactly this). The problem is that MEMOIRS fails on all three counts. Carpenter, looking it seems for a studio project that he could prove his bona fides with, is manifestly wrong for this. Comedy is not his strong suit; the horror elements are quite deep in the mix; he was clearly unable to reign in Chase, with the result that this is much more Chase's movie than Carpenter's. Perhaps the only Carpenter-y thing is the attention to detail on the special effects, but that's about it.
Then there's Chevy. Superrrrr wrong for this role. Apparently Chase wanted this to be less of a comedy project and more about the existential sadness and loneliness of being invisible. Which, fine, but: you're Chevy Chase! All you can do is broad physical comedy! That's your whole thing! As a result, the best parts of the movie are when Chase is doing comedy-- which is quite rare-- and the worst are when he is having to actually sell the plight of his character. Ultimately, his character just comes across as an asshole. The entire film. There is very little arc to hiis character, and as such not much to root for. And Chase delivers lines which should have weight so flatly and and laconicly.
And then there is the script which is pretty bad, especially in the way that it completely grinds the movie to a half-way through by re-locating the action to Michael McKean's beach house.
There are some decent aspects of the film-- Sam Neill is rather good, and playing it totally straight, as the evil government guy. Gregory Paul Martin basically drags the horrible second act of the movie along with the incredible sonorous power of his voice alone. The film has some great visuals-- the MC Esher-style semi-invisible building, for example-- and some neat ideas about the realities of being invisible (Chase is unable to smoke eat in public because the everyone will be able to see the smoke entering his lungs or the food going into his stomach). But the film never manages to get ahold of what it is actually about and Chase never manages to convince in the scenes in which he is required to show a degree of pathos, his laid-back, smartass persona simply not right for the film that he wanted to make. The film also criminally underuses a number of normally great actors: the aforementioned Michael McKean but also Daryl Hannah (trapped in a horrible, chemistry-free love interest role with Chase) and Stephen Tobolowsy. Overall-- it's a mess which is occasionally interesting, but which is nowhere near as funny, weird, scary or thought-provoking as it clearly wants to be.
]]>
Watched on Friday December 6, 2024.
]]>
7.5
4K Blu Ray (Eureka)
Once again the POLICE STORY franchise does Maggie Cheung dirty, this time by having May pop up incongruously in the third act solely for the purpose of blowing Jackie Chan and Michelle Yeoh's cover and then needing to be rescued. Sigh...
But at least SUPERCOP has Michelle Yeoh, the secret sauce of this silly yet immensely charming cop thriller; she is absolutely wonderful throughout and does just as many death-defying stunts as Chan-- not that Chan is slacking (he spends what feels like at least five minutes of screentime dangling precariously from a rope ladder which is hanging from a moving helicopter), but Yeoh has to both throw herself off a truck and through a car windshield at speed (an outtake played over the credits shows just how insane this stunt was and how badly one takes went wrong), and then towards the end she launches a motorbike up onto a moving train(!!!)
As with the previous entries in the POLICE STORY saga, the stunts are the main thing, and they really are great here, especially in the breathless final 20 minutes. It also feels quite a bit different from POLICE STORY in terms of tone: less wacky and goofy (though still a pretty wacky and goofy-- the Lieutenant pretending to be Chan's elderly mother in drag in order to preserve his cover is quite something), slightly less reliant on physical comedy. It is much more plot-focused; as a result it is tighter and more coherent than the previous entries, even as it possibly misses the bizzare sense of humour and sheer unpredictability of the previous films. All the same, this is a very solid piece of martial arts entertainment and well worth checking out for the stunts alone!
]]>
Watched on Wednesday December 4, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Wednesday December 4, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Tuesday December 3, 2024.
]]>
6
Netflix
Muscular Detroit-set crime drama about brothers who reconnect after the murder of their adoptive mother and work to find out who was responsible for her death. If the scenario is reminiscent of 60s Western classic THE SONS OF KATIE ELDER, the execution feels far more indebted to explosive Michael Mann action thrillers (HEAT receives an express homage in one key action scene) and 70s Blaxploitation (the sensational Blaxploitation score being perhaps the best single thing about the film). The film's overly macho script is not really my taste, not helped by an irritatingly broad Mark Wahlberg lead performance featuring almost non-stop casual homophobia dressed up as "banter", as well as an almost criminal waste of Sofia Vergara and Taraji P. Henson stuck in badly underwritten as the blindly supportive/ridiculously antagonistic (depending on the scene) partners of our heroes. Despite this, the film is pretty solid overall. The use of Detroit as a character is well done, the film touching on the city's checkered history: police corruption, post-industrial urban decline, gang wars, gentrification, union politics. As mentioned above, the score is fantastic. John Singleton is a hell of a solid director-- the action scenes in particular are superbly executed. And, Wahlberg aside, the cast are pretty great, especially Tyrese Gibson and Andrew Benjamin; Fionnula Flanagan pops up in about three scenes as the dear departed momma and absolutely smashes it. Chiwetel Ejiofor has a one-note bad-guy role but he makes it work by leaning into it so hard that you can't take your eyes off him. Yes the film's plot is convoluted beyond all reasonable measure and by any standard the final showdown is incredibly dumb. But it is very watchable, well-made and the chemistry between the brothers is palpable. Overall-- there are elements I am not especially keen on, but it was much better than I thought it would be.
]]>
7.5
Disney+
Fincher's slick, assured direction, another banging Reznor and Ross score and career-best performances from Pike and Affleck (the latter of whom in particular could not be more perfectly cast in his role) elevate what is at heart a fairly silly, pulpy-- albeit incredibly entertaining!-- thriller. GONE GIRL is in truth, and despite the moody auteur visuals and serious 'society!!' tone, an early-to-mid-2010s update of 80s erotic potboilers-- and, frankly, just about as enlightened in terms of portrayal of gender, the film's characterisation of Amy Dunne as a one-dimensional 'crazy psycho' feeling only half a step removed from Glenn Close in FATAL ATTRACTION. As with those earlier erotic thrillers, the film has aged poorly with regards its misplaced attempt at a feminist statement, which ultimately amounts to forgiveness of the misogynistic behaviour of Affleck's character; Amy's behaviour is so objectively extreme that it ends up giving credence to male victimisation fantasies more generally. However, if one is able to put these more disturbing elements to one side (not necessarily an easy thing I will grant) you are left with a ridiculously entertaining, top-draw thriller delivered by people at their creative peaks: arguably, neither Fincher, Affleck nor Pike have managed to top their work here since. It will never be able to quite overcome the thematic stench that hangs over it, but GONE GIRL's incredible twists and turns-- and that absolute hum-dinger of an ending-- are hard to match.
]]>
3
Blu Ray (Criterion)
Despite an intriguing premise-- the film presents an odyssey of toxic masculinity as three friends express their grief by going on an epic, international bender-- HUSBANDS leans much too heavily into Cassavetes' worst instincts as director. Every scene feels stretched to three or four times its natural length, making the film-- an insane 2.5 hours in length!-- almost unendurable. I appreciate the point of the film is to be, to some extent, unendurable, and it is clear that Cassavetes is not endorsing the appalling behaviour of his three leads, especially their behaviour towards women (quite the opposite, in fact: their boorishness, lewdness and misogyny is made quite clear). The film certainly achieves what it sets out to do: make you hate, or at least deeply pity, these sad, insecure, emotionally repressed men. But a film can achieve it's goals whilst still not being an enjoyable or interesting experience. And HUSBANDS is neither enjoyable nor interesting, especially since (a) Cassavetes makes his point about these men inside the first 15-20 minutes, and then basically re-makes the same point over and over again in every subsequent scene, (b) the characters are, despite being played by three phenomenal actors, all one-dimensional and essentially interchangeable, (c) there is only so much drunken, barely coherent, randomly explosively violent assholery that one can take. And these things, taken together, somewhat obscure the deeper points about male friendship, how men relate to one another and to women, that Cassavetes is trying to make. In essence, HUSBANDS aims to put the viewer exhaustively, almost experientially into the point of view of the non-drinking friend along for the ride with his emotionally unstable, heavy-drinking pals. And, like any tee-totaller in that situation in real life will tell you, such a situation will get real old, real fast. Overall-- I get what Cassavetes is saying with this film, but it is a real chore to get through. For a considerably better version of this film, see Elaine May's MIKEY AND NICKY, which also stars Cassavetes and Falk.
]]>
Watched on Saturday November 30, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Saturday November 30, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Saturday November 30, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Thursday November 28, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Thursday November 28, 2024.
]]>
5.5
Disney+
Spirited if formulaic underdog sports story. It retains a certain amount of recognisably 90s charm, and Emilio Estevez is a decently charming (if ever so slightly checked out) lead as a selfish lawyer who becomes a kids' hockey coach and along the way learns about the joys of teamwork and not being an asshole. The hockey scenes-- which make up quite a large chunk of the movie-- are very well done. Hockey is such a dynamic sport and I'm not sure why there aren't more cinematic depictions of it. The film has a slightly odd, confusing-- but in light of it being an American film, not unexpected-- message: on the one hand it (rightly) highlights the unfairness of placing insane levels of pressure upon kids-- the fact that Estevez's character is still haunted by the nightmare of losing a game of hockey when he was 10 years old is silly, but at the same time gets to the heart of how failures in childhood can really stay with you ; on the other, it never really challenges the notion that winning is the most important thing in the world (even if it does suggest that winning is that much sweeter if you win alongside friends, etc). But, to be fair, expecting nuance and social commentary from a silly family film might be asking too much. But the main issue with THE MIGHTY DUCKS, in my view, is the kids themselves, of whom there are far too many and none of them really do much to stand out as interesting characters in their own right. Most of them fall into irritating 90s kids film cliches, as either streetwise tough-guy punks, quiet, overly sensitive boys with silly floppy hair, variable comic relief (the Loud Fat Kid; the Kid Who Makes Bad Jokes, etc), or some combination of all three (there are also a couple of girls on the team, who between them get about three lines of dialogue). This is all very much par for the course for the time, presumably an attempt by Hollywood filmmakers to recreate the lighting-in-a-bottle of THE GOONIES, but I just found it all a bit cacophonous and annoying.
That said, it would take a heart of stone not to be at least a little bit stirred by the final game...
Random thoughts: the concept of a guy with a DUI charged being punished by *checks notes* being put in sole charge of a bunch of children is absolutely wild and VERY 90s. It is certainly the case that this film could not be made today! I hated the random little cartoon sounds that would be added in from time to time, presumably for comic effect. It doesn't really fit the tone of the film. I also found the romantic storyline a total dud, especially since it is basically set up by one of the kids who spends much of movie trying to very sincerely get Estevez to bang his mom (I get that kiddo wants a new daddy but its weird!). The "Oreo line" recurring joke feels deeply uncomfortable in 2024. I feel like this is the sort of film that had I grown up with it I would absolutely love it for the nostalgia but since I didn't it just seems dated and strange.
]]>
6.5
Netflix
Even by the standards of melodramatic Korean thrillers this one is twisty. There are at least five rug-pull twists, each one getting progressively sillier and more nonsensical, the world of the film existing in this heightened state of unreality (and emotionality) that calls to mind the work of Park Chan-wook in particular. But there is no denying that FORGOTTEN is, for precisely these reasons, an incredibly entertaining watch which will keep you fully engaged and on the edge of your seat-- even if that is largely so you can see just how crazy the twists get (there is one rug-pull I was unhappy about as it relies upon the film actively lying to the audience about the identity of a major character-- and much of the narrative thereafter pivots around this particular point. But overall the twists are fun). Underneath all of the Hitchcockian psychodrama there are themes of guilt, loss and quiet, impoverished desperation, delivered in the trademark Korean melodramatic style. Overall-- sad but entertaining.
]]>
Watched on Monday November 25, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Monday November 25, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Sunday November 24, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Sunday November 24, 2024.
]]>
5.5
Blu Ray (Eureka)
A great comedic performance from Kurt Russell as an amoral used car salesman/ aspiring senator and a genuinely thrilling (and superbly executed) car chase finale elevate what is otherwise an overly broad, muggy, chaotic screwball comedy. Whilst not devoid of laughs (nearly all of which comes courtesy of Russell), and whilst certainly directed with verve by Zemeckis, the film's humour feels very much of its time period: for one thing it is relentlessly, almost suffocatingly horny-- obsessed with T&A and trying to get laughs off sexual assault; for another, it tries to reach for political satire that is nowhere near as clever as the filmmakers think it is (a used car salesman going into politics is an idea funnier in theory than in execution). The film also dips a little too hard into racial and sexual stereotypes, in a way which probably felt refreshingly transgressive at the time, but which feels cringingly dated now. So overall, despite some neat ideas-- I love the set up of two dueling brothers who own competing secondhand car shops across the street from one another-- and some minor laughs, this one is best seen largely as an interesting but deeply flawed curio in Zemeckis' early career.
]]>
4
Netflix
An ambitious, audacious film for sure, but similarly to CRASH it is a well-intentioned but ultimately very clumsy and tone-deaf attempt to tackle issues about living as a trans person and the epidemic of gang violence in Mexico without exhibiting any real or deep understanding of those issues nor any real idea of what it is it wants to say about them. Partly as a result of this, EMILIA PEREZ feels completely all over the place both structurally and thematically, wobbling from character to character and issue to issue, never quite settling on any one thing. As such, the film tries to be a spunky musical, an Almodovar-esque comedy, a hard-hitting crime thriller, a melodrama and a character study, all at the same time. The rightness or wrongness of the portrayal of a trans character and the trans experience generally I will leave to those with more expertise than myself, but I will say that it might not have been the best idea to have the trans character in this film start off as an evil, homicidal drug lord (and the way this film ends is also... not great). The musical numbers are a mixed bag, but overall are weirdly unmemorable, with choreography and production that needs to feel much bigger and more impressive than it does. The acting is strong across the board, but nobody has much to work with. Overall-- I feel as though, again like CRASH, this film will in a few years be seen as an embarrassingly earnest curio that few are willing to try to defend.
]]>
5
Amazon Prime Video (Rental)
A film I've never really understood the praise/adoration for. Yes, the performances are excellent (Norton especially) and, yes, Spike Lee's direction does to some extent elevate the material, in particular by turning the pulpy story into a wider post-9/11 city symphony (though the celebrated "Fuck New York" monologue feels to me like a much inferior version of the very similar speech from DO THE RIGHT THING). The big problem, to my mind, is Beinhoff's screenplay. Many of the scenes feel repetitive: Monty meets with another character, Monty feels sorry for himself, the other character monologues at him about how to survive prison, rinse and repeat. The script seems weirdly obsessed with prison rape which, whatever, but by the time the third or fourth character has given a speech amounting to "Monty you are so pretty you're gonna get raped immediately" the bit has gotten pretty stale, with gay panic undertones. That aside, Beinhoff trying to write "alpha male" dialogue is pretty cringey at times-- there's a exhausting scene near the start set in a Wall Street bank which is literally just a bunch of assholes braying things at each other ("Bro you gonna fuck her tonight?" "Yo, hope you save some for me!"-- not exact quotes, but close enough). Thankfully Beinhoff is on considerably more solid ground with the more sentively handled relationship between the three friends, which is a fairly decent portrayal of long-term male friendship-- albeit somewhat dented by the horrible subplot in which Philip Seymour Hoffman's character lusts after one of his 16/17 year old students. Beinhoff reaches for pathos with the highly emotive ending, but this didn't really land for me. This was primarily because for that ending to work you have to care about the character of Monty. But I just didn't, because Monty is (and this cannot be emphasised enough) a massive piece of shit, a privileged kid from a wealthy family who chose to become a drug dealer and who never seems to show actual remorse for his actions. Instead, the film largely just shows him feeling sorry for himself; he is sorry he got caught, not sorry for being a criminal (something which he was in no way forced to be-- it isn't as though he came from an impoverished background and this was the only realistic life choice for him). On occasion the film comes close to recognising this-- but then throws it away with that ending, which yes I appreciate is somewhat ambiguous but which also invites the audience to really want Monty to get his redemption, his second shot at life, a chance to start over, etc. I'm just not sure I wanted that for Monty-- no matter how much they try to "nice guy"-wash him by having him literally save a dog's life in the opening scene. Had the film done more to establish genuine remorse on Monty's part or to actually call him out on his shit a bit more then I think the ending (which in isolation is quite soulful) would have worked better for me.
]]>
Watched on Friday November 22, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Friday November 22, 2024.
]]>
7.5
Amazon Prime Video (Purchase)
Well isn't this film just charming as all hell? Jack Nicholson as a prickly, frequently hospitalised, Viagra-swlling womaniser who learns the error of his ways? Check. Diane Keaton giving a sensationally empathetic performance as a confidence-lacking middle-aged playwright learning to love again? Big check. Supporting roles for a sassy, feminist Frances Mcdormand AND a hunky, ridiculously charming, post-THE MATRIX Keanu Reeves? Check check check (Jon Favreau is also in this movie for some reason)! Plus, the script is excellent, feeling distinctly like an 80s/90s Nora Ephron joint; the flashy 'just asking questions' scenarios ("can men and women be just friends after sex?" "How important is an age gap, really?") are really secondary: what Myers is really interested in here is examining the realities of love in middle age, which she does tenderly and amusingly, but always without judgment. Highlights include: the meet-cute in the kitchen!; Nicholson's reaction to seeing Keaton naked!; Keaton's crying montage!; Keaton and Nicholson crying in bed together after sleeping together for the first time (lotta crying in this one); the Harry dancers!; the wonderful image of Nicholson alone on that Paris bridge!; the whole entire ending!; the fact that Myers didn't give herself an easy way out by making Reeves' character a jerk! Not enough Mcdormand and probably a bit too long for what is, structurally, a fairly conventional rom-com, but it really does have so much heart and tenderness. Overall I thought SOMETHING'S GOTTA GIVE was hugely enjoyable!
]]>
5.5
DVD
Love love love the stop-motion animation, which more than holds up today. Also the voice cast, a great mixture of British character actors (Margolyes, Lumley) and unexpected Hollywood stars (Sarandon has a part as a goth French spider). Tons of imagination and grotesque courtesy in large part of Dahl's original story; whilst the story is a little threadbare-- and padded out with not especially memorable Randy Newman songs-- the economical running time works in the film's favour.
What hasn't aged well are the live action sequences, which book-end the film. They just look a bit... crappy? Cheap-looking sets which are obviously sets, weirdly plastic props and perhaps the poorest-rendered New York ever committed to film. I get the Burtonesque aesthetic that Selick is going for here, but it just didn't work for me. That and the fact that the kid playing James is really frigging irritating and twee!
]]>
Watched on Sunday November 17, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Sunday November 17, 2024.
]]>
Watched on Sunday November 17, 2024.
]]>
7.5
Amazon Prime Video
Sweet, soulful and heart-breakingly melancholic, LOOK BACK is a gorgeously animated, deeply felt character study about friendship and artistic inspiration. It also touches upon the realities of working in Japan's manga industry. At only an hour in length it never outstays its welcome, and despite a typically anime third-act foray into the fantastical and emotional, the film still manages to keep its feet on the ground, its twists and turns always rooted in our deep engagement with these characters, especially Fujino, who bounces believably between teenage arrogance and crippling imposter syndrome. Loved all of the different art styles used for the various manga segments. Thought it was great!
]]>
6
Disney+
Cinematic junk food: comforting, pleasurable in the moment, but ultimately a bit unsatisfying. In this regard, DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE's closest cousin is SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME; similarly to NO WAY HOME, after the initial surge of affection wears off nobody will remember much about this film in two years' time. And, oddly, "affection" is very much the by-word here: looking past the route one plotting, the weird tonal pivoting between self-aware parody and deeply serious melodrama, the obscenely lazy-- and near constant-- needle drops, the gory R-rated violence (look out for that OLDBOY homage, film nerds!) and the eye-rolling bro humour, there is a huge amount of genuine affection for superhero movies-- especially the more underrated ones (or the ones that were never made at all). This makes some (not all but some) of the seemingly neverending cavalcade of cameos surprisingly emotional ones, giving certain actors an unexpected shot at closure in a similar way to Garfield and Maguire in NO WAY HOME. I was also surprised to find, in what is otherwise a very unreverential film, that LOGAN was treated with such genuine reverancw and respect (as it should be). That this is a major theme of the film is backed up by what happens over the end credits, which I actually found more stirring and emotional than anything in the film itself.
Other points. The film is very funny-- I laughed a lot, had a pretty good time, even though I will forgot 95% of what happened in about a week. The plot is a load of hot nonsense, and Reynolds' schtick is getting verryyyyy old. It was such a shame that the film essentially discards all of the characters who were built up over the past two films, instead giving them glorified cameos and using them as Deadpool's motivation. Why are half the battle scenes in this movie totally pointless from a narrative point of view? Actually, let's go further: why does it feel like Reynolds and co just asked a focus group of 15 year old boys what they wanted to see in the movie and just shoehorned all of that shit in, regardless of whether it works or not? Matthew MacFaddyn is wonderful, more of him in everything please. Corrin gives a good stab at imbuing her one-note, underwritten villain character depth but she is fighting a losing battle. But the MVP is of course Jackman who... well, its Hugh Jackman. Playing fucking Wolverine. And he's doing the full drunk-ass, regretful, frequently violent version of Wolverine that he does so well. That alone is worth the price of admission, and to be honest I would have much preferred if this film was "Wolverine and Deadpool" rather than the other way round.
In closing: I enjoyed watching it. You would have to be pretty stone hearted not to find it amusing and affecting on at least some level (especially if you grew up watching the movies that it celebrates). But I don't think I need to see any more of these movies.
]]>
Watched on Friday November 15, 2024.
]]>
7.5
MGM+
Look, all you need to know about CLIFFORD is that the main character is a ten-year-old boy who is played by Martin Short, who was nearly forty at the time the film was made. No attempt whatsoever is made to disguise that fact that an obviously forty-year-old man is playing a small child; actually, quite the opposite: the film spends almost every scene practically breaking the fourth wall to let us in on the Big Secret: "Hey! It's Martin Short! But he's playing a little kid!" Much of the humour therefore relies on the tension between what the audience is seeing and what the other characters are (apparently) seeing, since nobody in the film ever stops and says "Hmmm... doesn't this kid just look a bit... wrong?" (I know that at one point Grodin is like "why can't you be a normal kid?!" but I took that more as a dig at Clifford's behaviour than the way he looks).
Also-- Short elects to play Clifford in the most surreal ways possible, his dialogue littered with bizarre kid-logic sentence construction, his behaviour creepy and borderline-sociopathic and constantly mugging at the camera in a way that feels like a proto Jim Carrey. It's a lot, but it is also such a bonkers performance that I can't help but respect it (and find it very funny indeed).
So thats the joke for the whole movie. Martin Short. 10-year old boy. Complete and utter sociopath. You'll either find that concept-- and, lets face it, all this movie has is that concept-- utterly hilarious in an absurdist sort of way, or you'll find it the most annoying, off-putting thing ever. I can count myself very much the former camp. CLIFFORD is hilarious, swinging wildly between broad physical gags, insanely dark humour and random sketch comedy. That the film succeeds is in large part because of Short, who swings for the fences in every scene. He is just so fucking WEIRD in this movie, and I totally dig it. But it wouldn't work without Charles Grodin, who basically spends the whole movie reacting to Short's madness, his anger levels steadily rising as Clifford's behaviour becomes more and more extreme. When he finally blows it is a treat, but even before he gets to that point it is very funny-- largely because frustrated, quietly seething Grodin is the funniest Grodin. Together, Short and Grodin channel something akin to the dynamic of DENNIS THE MENACE, only considerably more strange and surreal.
Plus Mary Steenburgen is very lovely in this film as Grodin's sweetly naive girlfriend; her in this film kind of got me thinking about her very similar role in STEPBROTHERS, albeit that is a film about a couple of guys in their forties who act like ten-year-boys, whereas in CLIFFORD it is the other way round. Anyway, she is great.
But yeah. One of the weirdest, wildest films of the 90s. Maybe ever. But if you are on its wavelength then there is much to enjoy, from the framing device, in which Short is aged up (and is now a priest...?) to tell his story to an (actual) ten-year-old (I guess this gives the film a sort of redemption arc?), to Richard Kind exploding with incoherent rage as Clifford's father, to the entirety of the Dinosaur World sequence, in which the film suddenly becomes an action-adventure story out of pretty much nowhere. That's not to even mention the opening credits, which feels like something out of THE PRINCESS BRIDE. Overall, CLIFFORD is bonkers, but kind of great!
]]>
7.5
Blu Ray (Eureka)
I maintain that the first 2/3rds of STEAMBOAT BILL, JR. is not necessarily Keaton's best material, though I did enjoy the hat sequence, and also the character of the father, who alternates between intense frustration at Keaton's inability to act like a "real man" and intense protectiveness of his wayward son. And there is an interesting (possibly ahead of its time?) message in here about predatory capitalism, with the greedy King conglomerate taking over from the small, honest "mom and pop" businesses-- as represented by the rivalry between the swanky new steamer The King and the father's seen-better-days wreck the Stonewall Jackson.
But let's be honest-- the film is all about that final 15 minutes, which are perhaps the finest of Keaton's career. Not necessarily the funniest, but in terms of ambition and sheer spectacle it (just) manages to shade THE GENERAL. Fighting against extreme weather (which is very realistically portrayed with practical effects) and with structures falling down (or just blowing away) all around him (or on him), Keaton's one-man rescue of his sweetheart, his father and his father-in-law represents a genuinely thrilling triumph of man-against-adversity. That STEAMBOAT BILL, JR. would turn out to be Keaton's last hurrah as an independent filmmaker makes his character's glory in this film all the more bittersweet. A wondrous film.
]]>
Watched on Thursday November 14, 2024.
]]>
4.5
Netflix
Looks lush and obviously sounds amazing. But outside of a handful of individual scenes-- the extended practice take is a particularly impressive feat of physical performance-- there was very little here that moved me. And that's a problem when MAESTRO is so immensely sincere at all times. Maybe I wanted it to be more like ALL THAT JAZZ: more eviscerating, funnier, rawer, more interesting. As it is, MAESTRO ends up becoming (after an energy-packed first thirty minutes) somewhat dull and stodgy, a series of vignettes often jumping years at a time between scenes with little connective tissue to link them, mostly of the "people talking at each other on rooms" variety. What they are usually talking about are events which have already occured off-screen, which would probably have been more interesting to actually show the audience. Cooper's performance is incredibly odd, both showy and at the same time weirdly distant, never permitting the audience to forge an emotional connection with his Bernstein. He is not helped by a script which fails to properly explain why Bernstein was such a singular composer, how his career progressed, etc. Mulligan-- normally absolutely fantastic-- is also disappointing, her performance descending into a caricature of distracting tics and ill-fitting accents. Again, the script does an incredibly poor job at explaining or examining their marriage-- we never get a sense of why exactly they are together or why they stay together. The ending was also bizarre in its abruptness. Overall-- a film clearly made with a huge amount of love and passion, but I was never clear on what it was meant to say or how we are supposed to feel about Bernstein or his legacy.
]]>
6
Amazon Prime Video
It would take a heart of stone not to find this pretty charming for the most part: adorable ragamuffins! Going on an adventure to bake their sick mum a blueberry pie! Kid banter! All shot in 16mm! It's kind of like if Spielberg and Taika Waititi had a baby! But the problem is that at nearly two hours in length, the kid banter does start to wear a bit thin by the end-- the naturalistic dialogue has an endearing sloppiness and randomness at first, but as the film goes on they start to cross the thin line into irritating quirk. And the narrative, whilst bustling with energy at the start, gets stuck in a rut in a baggy middle section that spends too much time wheel-spinning. It ends strong though, and there is no doubting that the film is packed with ambition and character.
]]>- The Substance
- Civil War
- Love Lies Bleeding
- Kinds of Kindness
- Crossing
- Monkey Man
- The First Omen
- Twisters
- Mean Girls
- In a Violent Nature
...plus 10 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- They Live
- Escape from New York
- Assault on Precinct 13
- Halloween
- Prince of Darkness
- In the Mouth of Madness
- Christine
- The Thing
- Starman
- The Fog
...plus 4 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Beetlejuice
- Big Fish
- Ed Wood
- Edward Scissorhands
- Pee-wee's Big Adventure
- Frankenweenie
- Corpse Bride
- Batman
- Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
- Sleepy Hollow
...plus 1 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Tokyo Story
- I Was Born, But...
- Late Spring
- Tokyo Twilight
- The Flavor of Green Tea over Rice
- Early Spring
- Equinox Flower
- An Autumn Afternoon
- Early Summer
- Late Autumn
...plus 6 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Past Lives
- Tótem
- The Iron Claw
- Anatomy of a Fall
- The Zone of Interest
- Barbie
- The Holdovers
- Godzilla Minus One
- All of Us Strangers
- The Promised Land
...plus 10 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- The King of Comedy
- Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
- GoodFellas
- Gangs of New York
- The Wolf of Wall Street
- Taxi Driver
- Silence
- The Last Temptation of Christ
- After Hours
- The Departed
...plus 12 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Blood Simple
- The Exterminating Angel
- Once Upon a Time in China
- Limbo
- After Hours
- Withnail & I
- Secrets & Lies
- Casablanca
- Burning
- Ran
...plus 10 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Psycho
- Rope
- The 39 Steps
- The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog
- Blackmail
- Rear Window
- The Lady Vanishes
- The Man Who Knew Too Much
- Strangers on a Train
- Marnie
...plus 23 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Blade Runner
- Alien
- Thelma & Louise
- The Martian
- Kingdom of Heaven
- The Duellists
- The Last Duel
- American Gangster
- Gladiator
- Black Hawk Down
...plus 5 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>- Nashville
- The Long Goodbye
- The Player
- McCabe & Mrs. Miller
- Short Cuts
- Gosford Park
- Images
- Brewster McCloud
- Thieves Like Us
- Kansas City
...plus 3 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>