Sleeping Beauty is an animated film that Disney released in 1959. I'm happy to say that I found more than expected to enjoy about this movie. Most of what I held on to throughout the short run time were little aspects of the film that seem to have been lost to time, for better or worse. One example of this is the delicate application of short choral flares that punctuate key moments in Aurora'a life. I haven't seem many films from this era, but this one was my first exposure to this style and I was charmed. The animation surprised me as well at points in this film. Techniques used to show the magic of Maleficent and the fairies all worked, even when the effects seemed to be drawn on top of existing animation in a different art style. On a similar note, I actually didn't mind the backgrounds being drawn in a different style than the characters. That choice (likely made out of necessity) combined with the multi-plane camera technique makes the characters pop and provides a feeling of depth that I don't think you get out of other animated films that followed this one. Speaking of depth, the characters and plot of this movie lack it. This is an archetypal story and in terms of characters, on all accounts, what you see is what you get. Not a huge complaint - I didn't exactly go in expecting fully formed characters. But still worth mentioning as slight shortcoming.
Liked it, didn't love it. The beautiful music upstaged the first film and the animation made my jaw drop multiples times in the theater. My main gripe with this film is that I felt character arcs in this film were far weaker than in the first. That's a typical sequel problem though that tends to happen due to the difference between creating a world to tell a specific story versus telling a second story in an established world. That one gripe said, this was an absolute joy to watch due to the animation alone. The set pieces throughout this movie create opportunities for the animators to really shine and they fully deliver. This movie just set a new standard for this type of animation. On top of that, the music felt elevated above the first Frozen's. I'll need to listen to it more to fully understand why I feel that way, but I think the main reason is that these songs felt much more like they were meant to play in this movie and less like they were meant to be played in the car and get stuck in my head. That may just be because of novelty. Time will tell. The story is a bit lacking but there are still plenty of themes and messages to hold on to , even if the main characters are a bit more static than I'd prefer throughout the film. What really keeps Frozen 2 enjoyable is the stunning animation and exciting music. See it in IMAX if you can.
Lightly cheesy, fantastically patriotic, and unsurprisingly by-the-numbers. Great performances from Bale and Damon, but I think the star of the supporting cast was Caitriona Balfe, who played Bale's character's wife. Weak child performances, though. Real middle of the road on this one.
Torn about the messaging this movie is trying to get across. The dangers of child **** and the **** and marketability of trauma are there, but it was done in a way that felt a bit more honest than the usual "A Star Is Bord' formula. In being more honest, the message is muddled some, but maybe this film is attempting to critique that trope BY being a bit more honest to those people that do rocket **** at a young age, showing them as clearly flawed people, but still people whose morality isn't quite as black and white as most of these types of films make their stories out to be. Context was provided throughout the story for characters' actions and moods by Willem Dafoe's narration, which I felt really enhanced the honest approach the film was going for. Natalie Portman gives a phenomenal performance as per usual. My main critique is the choice to use the same actress to play both the main character and that main character's daughter in the second chapter of the film. It was just a bit jarring. Even though there's an argument to be made that it was done to show an inheritance of all of the troubles of the main character, I don't feel there were enough beats for that particular facet of the story to warrant such a jarring choice. Liked this one a lot. Btw, note to not watch R-rated films on planes. They edited out so much language that some scenes were actually difficult to follow.
A bit annoyed by how much this movie absolutely worships the music of the Beatles. Yes, their music is great, catchy, and timeless, but it was so much more than just their music that made them the sensation they were. If the world really did forget the Beatles except for one rando failing man and that man started performing their music, I'm sorry but I just don't believe their music alone would cast a spell on everyone that heard it and elevate that man to ****. There was an opportunity here to show the real struggle of independent musicians and artists. That even with songs that have the potential to be loved around the world, it takes a LOT more than that to achieve Beatles-level success, namely a lot of luck and a lot of connections. A movie with this premise could have shared the lesser known story of the failing artist with an audience that came to the movie wanting to see music they love. That love of the music would have put the films audience directly into the same level of frustration as the character would have been in. Instead, we got another movie that worships The Beatles. That's fine I guess, but this premise could have been so much more. I didn't like or side with any of the characters and the film clearly wanted me to. Also, there was far too much Ed Sheeran music for a Beatles movie.
Touching story that this documentarian was able to weave between the experience of himself and two of his friends AND tie it to skateboarding. Painfully realistic throughout its runtime, except for the ending which I have a hard time believing, but maybe I'm too cynical. Recommended from me, especially if you're into skateboarding.
Did this movie just get me to appreciate opera? Loved this one. Watched the three hour director's cut and it didn't lose me for one minute of it. It's an epic of one-sided rivalry about the dangers of envy, obsession, and devotion to craft over your own wellness entirely filled with beautiful classical music that is made surprisingly accessible by the characters' descriptions of it out of their own appreciation for it. There's so much going on in this film and it all comes together at the end with a final solemn message about the effect a life of self-defined mediocrity has on one's mind.
Wayyyy too many ideas for one film. I was somewhat on board for the first 40 min when it seemed like the film was going to be a meditation on AI and humanity, but the hard left turn into an epic journey through this world that included a charming robot male sex worker, a "Flesh Fair" robot killing pit, an underwater Manhattan, and a time jump of 2000 years leading to an alien race studying humans after the end of the world -- was a bit much. It's just difficult to glean any centralized theme from this film when there's SO MUCH happening. 90's CG didn't help, some strange acting choices didn't help, I'm not a fan of how hard they leaned into the Pinocchio stuff, and the John Williams score severely overpowered any scenes from the beginning I actually did like. Would not recommend anyone spend 2.5 hours on this.
Wow. WOW. Go see this right now before its gone. This weekend. Buy your tickets. This is a contender for my favorite of the year up there with Midsommar. So many images are burned into my head after watching this. This is a MUST SEE. Dafoe and Pattinson give two of the bravest performances< ever seen. This is a gritty, grimy, ghastly film that disturbed me in a very similar fashion to Midsommar. Ever piece of it has purpose and is executed masterfully to achieve the desired direction of Eggers. Give this movie awards. Teach it in classes. This movie is a clear vision completely finished to the T. I cant name a single flaw with it, for now. I'll be seeing this again this week and sitting on my opinion a bit before I give a rating on it (I'm clearly very hyped up on it right now) but its probably pretty clear to anyone reading this where I'm leaning...
Finally got around to watching this "critical darling". It's fairly one-note in what is has to say about narcissism and impermanence in adolescence, but that note still rings true. James Franco outshines all the Disney starts, but no one in the cast falters in their performance. The editing is ultimately what elevates this movie.
100% still holds up. Here's a list of things this movie had that Double Tap didn't, with examples. 1. Well written comedy with good timing
- Intro rules sequence with varying locations and examples of broken rules
- Columbus chase around the gas station
- Grocery store clearing
- Entire Bill Murray sequence 2. Actually heartfelt moments with emotionally driven characters
- Columbus having to kill his neighbor, "406"
- Enjoy the little things Native American shop destruction montage
- Tallahassee's dead son reveal
- Columbus/Wichita bonding scene
- Columbus 'Be A hero' moment 3. Fun and visually exciting action set pieces
- Killing 406 with bathroom items scene
- Intro rules sequence
- Entire carnival sequence Is it cheating to set your final set piece sequence in a carnival? Maybe. It still makes for some great moments, though. So much praise for this movie.
Comedy is subjective. The theater I was at was having a ball laughing at the jokes in this movie but they just didn't land for me or Lauren. 90% of this film is comedy, so it being outside of my sense of humor didn't leave much for me to like. Aside from the comedy though, there were no memorable action set pieces in my opinion. People went through walls a few times and there was one scene at the end that had a premise I liked, but the execution of all action in this film just felt pretty uninspired and that's something I remember differently about Zombieland 1. I also didn't feel the same comradery between the characters in this one. That might just be because I've come to dislike characters like 'Columbus' (played by Jesse Eisenberg), though. I don't think the sympathetic bumbling nerdy nice guy character type really works for me anymore. Emma Stone was the only character I didn't find myself willing off the screen whenever they had a line. The new characters being a stereotypical dumb blonde and a stoner didn't do much for me either. I went into this excited to see it and ready to like it. Lauren commented after that she was surprised at how excited I was to see it. That's probably because I remember really liking the first one. I'm going to revisit the first one soon (possibly today) because I feel very uneasy about how much I didn't like this one. One other note: a lot of scenes seemed quite blurry and one drone shot in particular seemed very low quality. The effects weren't anything to write home about either.
If it wasn't done so expertly by Vince Gilligan, I'd be mad at it for giving an answer we didn't need. I'm happy we got a definitive ending for Jesse Pinkman and I enjoyed the ride for two hours. I feel this was an appropriate run time and format for this as well. A series would have been too much and a release in theaters would have been gratuitous. I was entertained throughout and it was nice to revisit characters I've enjoyed watching for so long with a story that was engaging and surprising at times. Obviously give this a watch if you're BB fan.
Overhyped in the name of getting quotes like "there is the world before Joker and there is the world after Joked" spread all over the internet for reviewer clout. This movie is far from disappointing, but ANYTHING would have been after all the hype this film got (supposed standing ovations at festivals and winning an award a bunch of best picture winners have won previously). Now, about the actual movie In a lot of ways, its Taxi Driver with a DC skin. It has the same tone and a lot of the same themes, but plot beats and base character motivations are drastically different. What you've heard about Phoenix's performance is all true, but I also loved the sometimes demented, sometimes classic style of cinematography and how the score would switch back and forth between sounding like what the character's perceived feelings on the events/situations were in a scene and what a sane person's perceptions of that same scene would be (triumphant vs. horrific). In addition to Jaoquin's performance, I thought that the few brief moments the supporting cast were given to play in were acted flawlessly as well. Zazzy Beats, Bryan Tyree Henry, and Deniro all had a brief moment to shine and they all took full advantage. I only have two real complaints about the film. First, I thought almost all additional tie-ins to the DC universe were the weakest parts of the movie. One with pearls felt particularly shoehorned in. And second, I wish the film had cut to black on the last line of dialogue Phoenix delivered. It would have been just a bit more effective than the more drawn out ending we got, I think, because that last line has some real punch to it. Maybe it would have felt cheesy. Lmk. Not a masterpiece, but I really enjoyed it and will definitely see it again.
This was a difficult watch but definitely worth it. Haneke expresses the dangers of both repression and complete devotion to craft through these characters whose actors give such incredible performances. I'm going to need more than a hot take to fully absorb what Haneke is trying to say with this film, but on the surface level alone there are some beautifully shot and performed piano sequences as well as oppositely horrifying scenes performed so genuinely. The range of abilities on display by these two actors (Isabelle Huppert and Benoit Magimel) is shocking in the best way. I will definitely be seeking out more of Haneke's films, Huppert's performances, and Magimel's performances in the future.
"I mean come on, it's Scorsese" -someone who's only seen a couple of Scorsese films. Seriously though, I really liked it. We definitely watched it to prep for Joker and this film did not disappointing. This film is just as, if not more, relevant now as it was on release. This portrait of transformation of a mentally unstable nice guy into a full-on incel is haunting without championing such a transformation as righteous. You know Deniro's character has something wrong with him from the start. All it takes is one person to show him a supposed outlet for his anger and frustration. Because he lacks the capacity to distinguish said influence from others, he is drawn to it. Give it a watch if you haven't seen it.
This movie was a mood. A sensory slow burn with beautiful imagery and score but a plot that could've been done in half the time. Some new set pieces for a film in the space adventure genre, but one was particularly defiant of basic physics... That just de-immersed me for a second. It also doesn't particularly help a slow burn plot when your main character is written as cold and reserved (ex: Captain Marvel). Not bad, not great.
A bunch of great laughs. Could be called Avengers: Between Two Ferns, but it didn't hold back at all so I'm good. The plot was all that it needed to be - a delivery service for interview moments. Really enjoyed this one and recommend it to everyone.
I am both surprised and disappointed. Jafar was more **** than sinister and the mix of Will Smith with the genie VFW team was actually quite fresh. I think adding 1 good Jafar and removing 1 shoehorned Jasmine scene would make this movie pretty good. Will Smith's genie + VFW team have some real puppet strings pulling this score up on my scale.
This film is torn between the epic story it's trying to tell, the genre it's trying to live in, and the demographic it's aiming for. There are some beautiful set pieces, practical effects, and **** there's also Bill Hader (who | normally love) cracking unintentionally hacky jokes and giving like 40% to his dramatic scenes. There is an epic story being **** there's also the same three horror scare patterns repeated for the whole long runtime. There's themes of childhood trauma catching up with you despite **** there's also an incredible amount of reused footage from the first film in the form of unnecessary flashbacks. I wish this was an 8 episode miniseries. It would actually be digestible in that form and have the potential to be properly fleshed out. 2h50m is WAY too long for a popcorn horror movie like this. There's so many good pieces here. Way more than are required to solve this puzzle. Because of that, you get some pieces from other puzzles jammed in where other pieces should be. And the film suffers for that.
Under the Silver Lake is an ambitious, long-winded, dense, fantastical, unique gem. It boils down to the modern attempt at finding meaning in the world/life but it has many more themes and takeaways than that. The flippancy of millennial romance, the increasing paranoia about the world as it becomes more connected, the known marketability of humility and genuine artistry leading to faking those two things, the capitalization of media industries on the people with celebrity aspirations that those same industries ingrained into them from childhood, and the commonality of media industries chewing up and spitting out 99% of people interested in working in those industries - women in particular. The repetition of Garfield's character searching for hidden codes in an abundance of different types of media, nearing on an obsession of pop culture across mediums hit particularly close to home for me. Like I said, dense. Even for a 2.5hr run time. How does it pack so much in to one feature-length project? Symbolism, non-literal scenes/imagery, and a respect for the intelligence of the audience. 3 things that have tanked movies in the past. Sorry to Bother You is a recent example. Divisive among audiences that are unable/unwilling to go along for the ride or that were just plain mismarketed to. On less meta notes, Andrew Garfield fully embraced this role and I was surprised by his ability to do so in this film. Between this performance and that of his role in Silence, I hope to see more of him in the future. And despite this film's underwhelming box office performance, I hope the director, David Robert Mitchell, gets more work. I thought he significantly improved in his style and craft since It Follows, even though I can't imagine there was much increase in budget between the two films. This movie criticizes the film industry, the music industry, and pop culture as a whole. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that's why it didn't get a wide release. The realist in me knows it probably just wouldn't do well with general audiences (see Sorry to Bother You; Climax; Synechdoche, New York) and A24 knew that. Ifs just ironic that this mindset of a big production company and the movie's themes and messages are very nearly mirrored in some ways.
A little bit overrated, but overall liked it. Zack Gottsagen stole the show. Shia gave a good performance, but I just didn't believe his character L for most of the film. That may be a result of the script. Either way, Dakota Johnson disappoints. Overall found this to be a very earnest and well paced adventure with a classic indie absurdist crescendo thrown in. If you can still catch it near you, would recommend.
I can say one thing for sure. If you like movies that challenge you and send you home with something to think about it and talk about with friends, definitely go see this. If you like film in general, go see it because the conversation around this movie is an interesting one. Its rare that a movie comes out that can spawn as much curiosity as I've already seen this one do. This movie makes Hereditary look easy regarding how much it asks the audience to go through, in terms of pacing and imagery.
The Good: - Stunning James Cameron visuals - Engaging, interesting action - Took full advantage of "robots are fighting so we can do whatever we want to their anatomy' Alita & Yugo's unhealthy infatuation with each other (kind of ... see next slide) - Most of the film was action and did I mention it did that VERY well? The Bad: - Seriously crap writing - Attempted to combine 3 Volumes of the manga into one movie when just 1 or 2 would've worked just fine and still told a complete story - Sequel Bait. So hard. Alita and Yugo's infatuation is played as a healthy relationship - I'm talking L-word in what seems like less than a week in movie time - Jennifer Connelly's character was nothing and no one - Needlessly renamed Yugo to Hugo while all other characters' wacky names stayed the same from the manga Tough to give a rating because I actually want to see more but there were just so many flaws .
Loved: - Character development Venelope's song - Princess Team-up - Shank & Yes - Film's take on friendship/ coadependency in nice guys - Visualization of the Internet - Cameos Meh: - Cookie cutter beginning & macguffin
I have not seen nearly enough Scorsese films, but this one clearly relates to his past works and reflects on them from a matured point of view. The music was purposeful and the performances were extremely believable. Not much more Io say about it than that.
This film is a real exercise in subtlety, both in acting and in storytelling. A handful of brief, meaningful moments sprinkled throughout the runtime creates an atmosphere that felt quite close to real life - which was fitting for a film "based on an actual lie". Its a shame that the brilliance of Awkwafina's subtle, but powerful performance here will likely go under the radar for most people (and certain awards groups). The execution of this film makes it feel like an honestly crafted window into Chinese culture. Highly recommended.
Oh no. I hate how well this worked on me. Granted, between my own pup looking eerily similar to Tramp and the fact that we traveled to Savannah the week before watching this, I am a bit biased. While I'm on the animation, it was a little wonky with Lady's face at first, but it seemed to improve as the movie went on (or I just got used to it). It also might have been that it looked better when they didn't stick her tongue out after every line, which they did in her first speaking scene. The other dogs looked fine throughout...except when they were doing stunts. I obviously don't want real dogs doing stunts, but it looked pretty bad in some. Especially when they faked any dog running. There's something they just couldn't get right with that. I also wasn't fond of the baby-talking puppies or the overly auto-tuned singing. All that said, the core story works, the replacement for the siamese cat song was great, and even if you haven't JUST been to Savannah, the setting is beautiful. So all that in mind, I enjoyed this movie far, FAR more than I expected to. It turns out giving dogs the live action treatment worked much better on me than it did when Disney did the same thing with warthogs and baboons. Big surprise, I know. A few hiccups keep it from surpassing the original, but this is still a great watch for fans of the original story, Savannah, or just DOGS.
In a crusading conclusion to a troubled trilogy, JJ Abrams brings his perception of a fan's perspective back to Star Wars in a way that suffers due to inconsistent storytelling and light-speed pacing that doesn't give a single moment enough time to breath. Where the original trilogy felt like the singular creative vision of one man assisted by many and prone to happy accidents, this trilogy feels like a fads love letter that devolves into just the worst kind of Twitter argument. And THAT leads to one of the only things I think both fans and haters of TLJ can agree on - - that what this trilogy lacked more than anything else was a strong creative direction. In terms of story, character, and tone, it just seems that the this trilogy a missing a certain Feigi-ness. What JJ did in this movie is essentially ignore 90% of what was set up in TLJ and spend the first half of this movie setting up the movie he wanted to make, throwing in occasional, more obvious jabs at TLJ throughout seemingly to appease and service all the fans that felt so wronged by it. I think some people that hated TLJ will love this film for doing that but to me it just comes off as inconsistent storytelling. Now to focus in on specifically this movie... I think, with the first half of this movie, JJ and the other co-writers in this film fell into an issue that many video game quest lines suffer from: McGuffin Russian Doll. Meaning that throughout the movie the characters were tracking down an object that led to another object, that led to a new character, etc. From my perspective, it amounts to making excuses to take your characters to new location after new location. And it is that faux pas in storytelling device selection that I think accelerated the pacing to a point of ridiculousness. Moments that should have hit like a train were give no time to breath. Character motivations, trials, and tribulations were skipped through like Netflix's 1.5x viewing speed feature was turned on. Don't get me wrong, there were plenty of moments I enjoyed in that first half, but truly, almost everything just felt rushed for that whole first half of the film. I do think the second half caught itself a bit, but without the fleshed out setup that was required of the first half, everything I liked about the second half was somewhat dulled. Without the context of the trilogy, I actually lean ever so slightly towards liking this film. But with that context (which cant be ignored) I'm much more on the fence about it. I enjoyed the ride while I was on it, but after taking some time to think about how this final piece fits into the puzzle that is the Skywalker saga, I'm a bit disappointed.
You are good woman, I am good man. Everyone is familiar with the issues this film has. Too many villains were difficult to juggle so there was a real imbalance in development yada yada baby yoda. BUT, how many super hero movies can claim multiple musical numbers and dance scenes? I'm just gonna say it. Spider-Man 3 walked so Joker could run. Does any of that make sense? No? Well then I've captured this film. Even with the memes, this one was a bit of a slog to get through. Bouncing between all of the stories is tiring and there's not much BUT memes to chew on or wait for on rewatch.
I found the wish-wash from Peter throughout this movie slightly annoying/childish. The Peter Parker dialog wasn't quite the same brand of goofy as 1. And to top it off, a good chunk of the camp is lost in favor of a more serious arc for Doc Ock. Alfred Molina's performance is wonderful, but not quite as good as I remembered it. There just wasn't that many beats to warrant all of the praise I hear for this performance. If I'm being honest, I think it only stands slightly above Franco's. ALL THAT SAID, this is one hell of a fun movie and still easily head and shoulders above ASM. The cafe scene and the train scene are iconic for a reason and any future Doc Ock will still have a lot to live up to compared to Molina. My main gripe is that I just had a lot less fun watching this movie than I did with the first in the series. The camp is still there, but its dulled a bit and I felt the relationships between characters and the fluctuations those relationships experienced to be less impactful than 1.
A family drama epic that's overwhelmingly fair to all characters. Fleshed out justification is shown for all actions taken, a rare trait in movies featuring predominantly teenage characters. It's not without flaw and hard to explain properly without spoiling, but I will try. Imagine HBO series Euphoria with a little more focus on parents/family and somehow even more neon. I was legitimately surprised several times in the runtime with the directions the story went and that was a fresh surprise in a film that's mostly a teen drama. In truth, regarding genre, this is movie is far more about family, parenting, and healing. Themes of warning of the dangers of parental expectation, the snowball effect that consciously making a bad decision can have, and the power of the effect that kindness towards others can have on yourself are all packed into this one. Sterling K. Brown is riveting as always but the real shining performances come from the two children of the family the film surrounds, played by Taylor Russell and Kelvin Harrison Jr. The equal, but opposite paths these two actors play their characters progressing through are performed so wonderfully. The neon aesthetic of the cinematography in this film also works quite well throughout the runtime.
Shia LaBeouf plays his own father in this clearly **** film for him about his troubled childhood. I had a hard time fully enjoying this film on its own merits because of the fact that Shia wrote and starred in it as his own father. That fact stayed in the back of my head for much of the film and while it enhanced some scenes, I feel like it retracted from the film overall. It's hard to describe, but I got the slight feeling that Shia wrote this film as an explanation or perhaps even an excuse for his behavior. I know how unfair that is to him and that I should probably give him the benefit of the doubt that this was written purely to tell his story and for his own artistic fulfillment, but once that thought wormed itself into my head, certain scenes started to take another light. Regarding purely the film without any background, this is a competently made film with clear thought put into shot composition, story structure, and character portrayal of real people. Shia, Lucas Hedges, and the child actor, Noah Jupe, all gave great performances. Jupe in particular was a welcome surprise, rising above other child stars (ironically, something his character did as well).
Delightful, heartwarming, sweet and it takes place in **** Germany :D Taika Waititi shines as ****. There's a sentence I never thought I'd say. The whole cast is wonderful in this film, just look at that poster, boy. They all brought it. This is a story about how hate can soak into young people due to an inherent need to belong. It message is particularly poignant in a time where a teenager's political leanings can come down to which subreddit they happened to click on first. Ifs hilarious, it's genuine, and it's easily one of my favorites this year.
Went in blind and saw one of the most woke films about police violence and Black America I've seen in a while. Watched the trailer afterwards and don't let it fool you; after a bit of a bumpy start, the performances and cinematography hard-carry the somewhat weak script (dialogue felt a little manufactured at some points to me). Pleasantly surprised at this one.
This is simultaneously the most campy and most dark Spider-Man movie. Ifs actually funny how some transitions and performances are so clearly indicating camp while scenes that follow take themselves 1 00% seriously. I think this movie works because of this formula. The campiness endears you to the characters such that when they are thrust into those perilous and/ or dramatic scenes, you do really care about them. Thinking about it more, this is not a new concept. Sitcoms and dramedies had been doing it for decades. I think this may just be the first time we saw it in a big name superhero movie. (please Imk if I'm forgetting a prime example) My only real complaint (barring the dated CG) is MJ's character. There's a lot implied about her and Peter's relationship but by the time her big "I love you" speech comes in at the end, I don't know if were had quite enough between the two of them to warrant that Peter's also an eensy but creepy (taking two buses and a cab to meet her outside her audition) but they're supposedly long term childhood friends so maybe not that bad? Again, some telling rather than showing going on there. Brilliant casting, an age old formula, and a hilarious Dafoe performance. Never a dull moment in this film and I enjoyed myself to the point of annoying Lauren. My scale is an enjoyment scale. Don't @ me.
Brutally honest and seemingly true to life portrayal of the decomposition of a marriage. Driver and Johansson give two of the best performances of their careers and Noah Baumbach is at his Baumbachiest with dialog, actions, composition, and drama depicted as if it is actually real life. The immersion into the story that direction and those performances create is undeniable. These characters feel like real people. The story never takes a side and drives you to an understanding about the polarity and dissension of the process of divorce.
A gutting, fantastical, cruel, and beautiful story of an honest, poor, downtrodden man out of time. This Italian indie darling is on Netflix right now. its not animated as the poster might have you think and it is most definitely worth your time.
Need a lesson in 70s black standup? DOLEMITE will fill your cup. Craving an honest take on blaxsploitation? DOLEMITE will bring you elation. How bout a love letter to grass roots film making? DOLEMITE is time worth your taking. Eddie Murphy melts right into this exciting portrayal of a lesser known piece of comedy, cinema, and even rap history in a performance and script worth making this comeback for. I am astounded just to what degree by the end of the film how little I saw Eddie Murphy and how much I saw DOLEMITE. This performance should be celebrated and it was a joy to watch. This film really does have something for everyone and I came out of it having learned quite a bit about 70s black stand-up, the blaxsploitation genre, and the feeling of producing a feature with next to no money behind it. It is a dramatization of course, but I left with a drive to dig into Wikipedia pages and YouTube videos I never would have before to learn more (not to mention a plan to watch 1975's Dolemite on Amazon Prime). 'Dolemite Is My Name' is on Netflix right now. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly encourage you to watch it so we get more Netflix original films of this caliber and less of the Tall Girl' variety... This is a triumph and I sincerely hope it gets nominated with the big names this year.
I liked this film, but I don't know if expectations are going to be met for audiences regarding the film's focus. They weren't for me. This is much more of a story about how Mr. Rogers affected Lloyd Vogel than it is about Mr. Rogers. In fact, I'd argue Tom Hanks is not even a co-lead in this film. Don't get me wrong, an interesting, if subtle, story is 1 told here and most people will walk out happy (myself included), but it is not what most will expect. I did like it fine, but I thought it was just okay. It was no "Won't You Be My Neighbor? "from last year. The story was just a bit too undramatic and (probably true to life to evoke the big feels I wanted from it. Ifs fine to tell an honest story, but to dramatize a true story for the big screen usually means you punch it up with some real drama. With this film, I didn't feel that work had been done. Now *that may be a choice that was made* because Mr. Rogers was often quite subtle in how he conveyed stories and messages, bui the result here was just a bit too "meh" for me. Still, there was one moment in the film that will stick with me as something I've never seen a film do before and that had a real effect on myself and, seemingly, the audience I was in. So there's some good and some 1 bad here. I won't be revisiting it. Recommend if you 4 are a Mr. Rogers fan (who isn't?) and are okay with it 4 not quite being a film *about* Fred Rogers.
Emma. is a sweet, slow-starting period piece about young love that grows on you as you watch it. Although allowing oneself to become invested in this film feels a bit like homework at the start, it is well worth it. The language of the film -- in terms of dialogue, camera movements, and audio cues --takes a few scenes to learn. Once you do, the power of subtlety in the the technical fields of film making is on full display. Except for in walking scenes, the camera is nearly entirely still. This amplifies the slightest push in/pull out of the camera 100% and drives home the emotion being portrayed in that tiny moment in a real way. The same can be said of audio cues in the film, but not the score overall. I enjoyed the score when it was applied purely for transitional scenes, but otherwise it didn't stand out to me when compared to other period pieces like The Favourite. And this film is definitely going for the same vibe as The Favourite, even if it is a bit more mild in it's humor. Regarding story, I haven't read the original Jane Austen text, but this story easily could have came off as a YA teen drama romance. It didn't to me. I think that's partially due to the elevated dialogue, partially due to the film making techniques, and mostly due to the performances. A+ to Anna Taylor-Joy, Mia Goth, and Johnny Flynn. I'd only head of the former before seeing this but I'll be looking out for them all in the future. Emma. has a lot of good going for it. I do think the humor was a bit too subtle at times and 1 or 2 subplots could have been trimmed out to help the pacing. It's on VOD right now. Can't say I'd recommend paying the asking price for it unless you really love period pieces.
I haven't watched IB in about 10 years. Safe to say my perspective has changed. I am disappointed in 14yo Jordan. What I once viewed as a **** killing romp is now showing so clearly to me as a criticism of war movies and flat out war and blanket vilification in general. A large majority of this movie glorifies the killing of **** with triumphant music and over exaggerated sound and visual effects all the way until the climax. At that point we are shown portions **** propaganda film screening where **** in the crowd gleefully revel in the pictured killing of American soldiers. Quite a similar behavior to that which the movie has caused the audience to experience up until this point. To really nail home this point, once the **** theater is set ablaze and the basterds open fire on them like fish in a barrel, we are shown this scene through the exact same framing as the **** propaganda showed its hero: a solider in a crow's nest picking off the enemy below set to triumphant music. The criticism here is clear and I love it. (please excuse me for how late I am to properly interpreting this movie). I can't believe I missed it ~10 years ago. Tarantino even goes one step further past his criticism in the final scene wherein he clearly draws a line that shows this film does not sympathize with **** in any way. THAT is not the message he wants to convey and it's an increasingly important line to draw as the film ages, unfortunately. I was pleasantly surprised at how many scenes/shots from IB are burned into my brain. The eyes beneath the floorboards, the scooping of the cream, the inferno of maniacal laughter --I love it all. And I'm sure I don't need to retread all of the other reasons this film is incredible. This re-watch may have just bumped this into my all time top 10. I don't ave a single complaint and 2.5 hour flew by. It's on Netflix right now.
A few jump scares and plot holes short of a fantastic horror film, but still a great one. There's a lot I loved about The Invisible Man. The way the camera moves to emphasize negative space in the tension building scenes and precisely track movement throughout action scenes shows a real attention to detail and context. The sound design (minus the jump scares) created an atmosphere where any mundane household noise could foreshadow a scare. And Elizabeth Moss will never fail to impress with her ability to play distressed, imprisoned, powerful, and courageous. Her character here is not too far off from June in Handmaid's Tale. All of those elements really made me want to fully embrace this film. Unfortunately, it seems like the need to appeal to/please wide audiences overtook the main artistic direction in this film. Needless jump scares with the cheesiest loud sound queues are peppered throughout the film, sometimes in places that seem like they would have been scarier without the tired quick cut/loud bang trope. Dialogue sometimes seems incredibly forced. And I'm not usually a hole-poker, but the ending has some obvious logical failings.
I think all of my favorite Daniel Craig bond moments/quotes are from this movie. The construction chase, the Vesper origin, "It appears someone here knows something I don't", "Get the girl out", rope chair, the "smile and little finger" quote, the fake-out ending, etc. the list goes on. I don't just love these moments because they're cool or for (purely) nostalgic reasons. They all inform the character of this new Bond we're being introduced to. LFTS has a great video on how the construction chase scene in particular does this. Worth a watch. This film introduced us to a reckless, ego-driven Bond whose greatest strength and greatest weakness is his refusal to accept defeat. That in mind, the concept of structuring this movie around a poker game is incredibly conducive to this character. What type of people most often ruin their lives because of their refusal to accept defeat? Gamblers. This connection between character, setting, and plot create an incredibly tight theme for this film. (spoilers for a 14 year old film) The other main element this film gets right is the complex romance between Bond and Vesper. It feels earned. Yes, we do get the classic short life expectancy Bond girl at the start of the film, but Vesper subverts this trope by bonding with Bond la through shared trauma, creating a seemingly genuine relationship with him, and ultimately betraying Bond whilst simultaneously protecting him. It's a complex relationship that made the fake-out ending worthwhile and amounted in yet another memorable action set piece: the sinking building in Venice. The memorable set pieces, quotable lines, classic score, and twisting plot of Casino Royale make it a film I love and will definitely come back to. Its on Hulu and HBO if you feel like giving it a watch.
A sled dogs movie that uses real dogs and pups (except in perilous situations) with Willem Dafoe 100% into his performance, as usual. This film also sets the record straight about Balto. Lauren was shocked. My only gripe is the blurry-edged border applied to the whole film. Other than that, loved every bit of this heartwarming and adorable movie.
Bong Joon-ho's second feature is a well-executed, if by-the-book, police procedural. This film would fit right in with a lineup of Zodiac and Se7en. Two clashing detectives investigate South Korea's first documented serial killer. One detective relies on his gut (and what he's learned about detectives from movies) and one relies on documents and facts. Tale as old as time, amirite? Where Memories of Murder sets itself apart from more bland films in this genre and put itself on the level of Zodiac and Se7en is in its cinematography and character arcs. There is some quality about a film's opening shot that tells you you're in for a treat. I won't spoil it, but this one has that x quality. The Korean scenery throughout Mom, from fields of crops, to lush mountainous forests, to a strip mine are all shown with a cold offset in color such that their beauty is still apparent, but the reality of the film's plot infects each one. Reality is something Bong must have aimed for in this film in terms of the violence depicted, as well. Any fight that occurs is so messy and real-feeling that I started to wonder if the actors were actually beating each other just for this movie. Obviously not the case. It's just extremely sloppy in a realistic way and it works. All that praise said, MoM still does have a lot of the trappings of any film in this genre. Conveniences in both the finding of clues and the timing of finding said clues are apparent and occasionally deimmersifying. That's my only major complaint. It's no Parasite, but it's definitely better than Snowpiercer. Any fan of crime genre films should seek this out.
This film is incredible. Robert Pattinson stars as a man willing to do almost ANYTHING to help his mentally disabled brother. In short, it's the story of one single night where Pattinson's character must use everyone and everything he possibly can to do so. Pure chaos and anxiety underscore this entire film. The tone is so claustrophobic and intense, in part thanks to the brilliantly themed camera work, that the runtime absolutely flies by, never letting you leave the edge of your seat. Between this film and The Lighthouse, I am fully convinced of Pattinson's acting chops. He did his glittery vampire thing for a few years to make some money and now ifs clear he's pursuing projects and creators that have real voice and vision behind their projects. AND he's rising to the occasion that such creators require to achieve their vision. The suffocating way that this film is shot requires a lot of ifs actors. Every slight facial movement is amplified and Pattinson pulls off this cutthroat well-intentioned criminal perfectly. Apparently some real guerilla, ask-for-forgiveness film making was employed in this film's production and it really shows. Its frantic, nerve-wracking, and extremely high energy. Highly recommend.
