[9.9/10] This is one of the absolute pinnacles of the sitcom form, with tons of intersecting storylines that are each as clever as they are uproariously funny.
What’s great about this episode is all the little gags that just come back in small but hilarious ways. The big stuff in this episode absolutely works, but whether it’s GOBs misuse of the word “circumvent,” or Starla’s snafus with the printer, or even just the oh so funny look on Lucille’s face when she closes the door on GOB, all the small gags work just as well in this.
The main story is pretty brilliant, with Michael’s quest to find his father (and retrieve the world-famous staircar) in Mexico coinciding with his efforts to have some alone time with his son, which George Michael sees as a way for his dad to get to know his girlfriend, Ann. It’s an insane situation mixed with a relatable one, which is something this show knows how to pull off. The absurdity of the group’s misadventures in Mexico is well done, and I just love the verbal gags of Michael referring to Ann as “egg” or “plant” or “Ann-hog.” It’s a little mean, but too too funny.
The bits with the bounty hunters are great too. Martin Mull is a hoot as Gene Parmesean in his escalating series of poor disguises and poorer accents (and Lucille’s reactions are absolute gold). GOB worrying that he doesn't have any friends, and hiring Ice the Bounty Hunter to chase after Michael, only for Michael to make them be GOB’s friends is clever and amusing writing.
Last but not least, I am over the moon about Buster’s storyline. There’s some great commentary in him going 6 minutes away from his home and thinking he’s in Mexico, great comedy in him feeling at home because his mom gave away all his stuff to the housekeeper, and great comic irony in him trying to run away from his mom for sleeping with Oscar, only to accidentally end up right back where (and seeing what) he tried to run away from.
Overall, this is a tour de force, and quite possibly the best and funniest episode of this show, which is no small accomplishment.
“I must go punch that baby.”
The first film of the Leeds International Film Festival 2023 (LIFF), and what a strong start!
Poor Things is a humorous, sexy, and Gothic tale that can be philosophically but in the most bizarre ways. There is something so wonderful about the weird, especially in art.
Emma Stone's performance as Bella Baxter was just glorious. It’s also a very “risky” performance because when we first meet her, she is a child in an adult body after being reanimated, with her vocabulary being on the same level as a three-year-old, and her uneven body posture/moments, as if she’s still learning how to move. There is A famous movie saying, “Never go full stupid”, but Stone finds the right balance that prevents it from being embarrassing to watch, which other actors failed at. However, that section is only at the beginning, and as the film progresses through her journey of becoming herself, we see her understanding of language and walking improve significantly.
Bella is a fantastic main character, and she’s easy to care about. We want to see her succeed, and Emma Stone was terrific.
This is the best performance I have seen from Mark Ruffalo, as every time he was on screen, the audience and I were laughing. His character is a loudmouth parody of the ladykiller, who takes Bella under his wing and has her for himself. He chewed up the scenery, and it was astounding. There is a scene in this movie where both Bella and he have a chaotic dance, but the little dance he does on his way to the dance floor, I can't stop thinking about it. It was so funny.
William Dafoe, which should come as no surprise, delivers a superb performance as the monster-looking scientist Godwin Baxter. He is often referred to as 'God' at times, with his patchwork flesh of a face having a distant cross on the right side of his face. He very much plays the role of God, as he does the impossible and gives new life to unfortunate lost souls.
I’m just saying this right now, but the Best Supporting Actor race next year might be the best if nothing ruins it. I hope not. Imagine this: Robert Downey Jr. for Oppenheimer, Ryan Gosling for Barbie, Robert De Niro for Killers of the Flower Moon, and Ruffalo & Dafoe for Poor Things.
Everything on a technical level, such as cinematography, the score, costumes, and the production design - all extraordinary and benefited in bringing this world alive. The whole movie feels otherworldly and timeless.
What I find compelling about director Yorgos Lanthimos is that if you examine his movies, the stories in his movies are simple. The Lobster is about fulfilling societal norms we feel we need to follow, such as getting a job, applying to a college and university, being with a romantic partner, having kids, having interests, and eventually dying. The Killing of a Sacred Deer is a horror revenge tale where a family gets cursed after the fathers' wrongdoings. The Favourite is a period piece drama/comedy about two reveals who try to win the love of a bipolar queen.
Poor Things is a fresh re-imaging of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (also based on a novel by Scottish author Alasdair Gray), remodeled as a coming-of-age story told through a female perspective. The needs, the wants, the issues, and losing our inner child in this demanding world. Unique and isn't afraid to approach sexuality so openly.
At the start, the character of Bella has the mind of a child while having an adult body but is not restricted and not insecure about things. She can be loud, messy, playful, and expressive in emotions. Especially when it comes to sexuality, hence the openness to it. Like, there's nothing wrong with something that everyone does, but we don't talk about it. As we get older and more exposed to the world, we get quieter, speak less, get insecure about things, care too much about what others may say/think, and become closeted. That is one angle of the film that I found incredibly compelling.
But the execution is wild. I do not buy for one second that it’s strange for the sake of it. It leans more into steampunk absurdism. Yorgos Lanthimos presents the events as they are without questioning them, as the surface level normality peeled back, and focuses on the strange happenings in life and people. He's one of the most unique voices in cinema, not only for what he has to say but what he must show and how to show it.
The only issue I had with the film was towards the end when it started to get a bit preachy, going as far as hitting you on the head with it, and I was thinking, "Alright, I get it."
Other than that, the film was excellent and one of the most unique and memorable experiences I had this year. Even if this is Yorgos Lanthimos's most accessible film so far, it may still be too much for some, but even with its peculiar nature, you will find it impossible to take your eyes off the screen.
This is great! I loved it!
'Nightmare Alley' is a superb watch! I particularly enjoyed the beginning and end, which are truly excellent; the middle part isn't as strong, but is still top notch in its own right. I love the dark atmosphere it sets from the get-go, the sound design is outstanding - some bits are so striking and I love it! It has a quality, engrossing story to boot.
Bradley Cooper leads the cast with quality, though he isn't even the sole standout of the film. He is joined by a whole host of terrific performers: Cate Blanchett, Rooney Mara, Toni Collette, Willem Dafoe, Richard Jenkins, David Strathairn ... I could go on, simply phenomenal casting! I wanted more of them all, and yet felt I got the perfect amount too.
The 150 minute run time went by incredibly quickly for me; if I hadn't known it was on for that long, I would never have guessed its length to be anywhere near that. It's a slow burn, but a slow burn done tremendously. Guillermo del Toro - this is the first film of his I've seen - & Co. did a super job, I have no complaints at all. I was toying for ages between a 9 or a 10 rating, it just about creeps its way into the latter.
Just brilliant. Go watch!
I had heard good things going in, and I was still thoroughly impressed. This is definitely my favorite movie I've seen this year, and quite possibly in the past few. While he is at some of his best in the movie, very little of that has to do with Nicolas Cage.
There is way more substance than the trailer gives you clues to. Outside of the rich narrative, the film is a masterclass in "less is more" to illustrate complex subjects through well executed inference. Michael Sarnoski's writing and directorial debut demonstrates some of the best storytelling skills I've seen in a long time. This will be a piece I point to for a while on effective filmmaking.
Underneath the novel premise of the movie is deep subject matter and one of the more mature explorations of grief and purpose in life. I wouldn't call this a feel good movie, but rather one that lays out a difficult but healthy and necessary path to dealing with tragedy and loss. I called Manchester by the Sea on of the best movies on grief ever made, because it showed how broken it can make people. Pig is an answer to it that shows the health of acceptance and recognizing the value in what we chose to spend our time doing.
Honestly not sure what I was getting into starting this movie. Obviously I am one of the many that are drawn to this because of its stacked cast haha. This movie has a lot of ground to cover; not only is it based off of a book (which is already a challenge in general), it also spans the course of 20 years with like, six separate arcs. It's not surprising that some characters seem a bit shallow compared to others just because of the need to cram as much as possible into a two hour movie. While it's disappointing not being able to dive deep into these characters, the actors do a stellar job at giving us a glimpse. I think every casting choice was perfect, to be honest. Tom Holland leaves behind the dorky cuteness of Spider-Man to fully shine as a twisted protagonist caught in a pressuring, depressing environment. Robert Pattinson blew me away. What the HECK was that accent. I loved it. LMAO.
What really gets me with the film isn't just its overall depressing themes— it's how all those themes tie back to God and religion. Be warned this tackles tough stuff head on: extreme violence, murder, sexual assault/rape, animal abuse, & suicide are all in there. It's frustrating seeing all these characters justify their hypocritical actions with religious intent. It's depressing seeing the more good-hearted characters be gaslit with twisted religious reason. Please do not get me started on Pattinson's character arc, HA. What's worse is that all of these messages that are spread under the guise of the grace of God/God's will/what the Bible says, is that it's not really dramatized. This crap is coursing through Christianity to this day. I was constantly extremely uncomfortable throughout the movie. I started to go down a spiral of just wanting Tom Holland to kill everyone and get it over with, similar to the descent into madness you feel in the Joker as you either cheer Joaquin Phoenix on or wince as he laughs and cries. Either way, this film is definitely a think piece. Does it toe the line of just being trauma porn? Yeah. I think it depends on who you are as a person and how you view it as to whether or not it crosses that line. Catch your pastor preaching about this movie next week lol.
But uhh....BACK TO GENERAL STUFF. The score is absolutely phenomenal. I adored the music. The cinematography is subtle and gorgeous, and the set and costume design seamlessly build this small town world where everyone is related to everyone...ah, gotta love white people. While it is a slower film, I didn't find it to be boring. The suspense and tension built little by little serves for some great showdowns and climaxes between characters. It's a good watch for the cast and if you're into much darker pieces, but it's definitely not for everyone.
I've read that Bill Murray and Harold Ramis had huge fights over how Groundhog Day was going to be created. Murray wanted a film that feature existential questions while Ramis wanted something more of a screwball comedy. It seems as though the film ended up somewhere in the middle and that both men must have gotten at least a little bit of their way. Palm Springs seems to pick up a little bit where Groundhog Day left off. The main characters are placed into a situation where they are to question (along with the viewer) what makes up a life and what it means to have a tomorrow. Is it so wrong to have a life filled with comfort? What does the person in such a role owe the others that are not in the same role? And so on.
While I enjoyed the movie I wouldn't say that it is great. The leads were excellent (Samberg is a revelation) and the story was good even though I found the science part of the resolution to be pretty iffy. The movie was fun to watch and that's often the most you can hope for.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHateBadMovies
[8.1/10] What a delight this episode is! Just getting to see Matt Berry and Mark Hamill go ham-to-ham as a pair of contentious vamps is a gift from God. This doesn’t feel like an ordinary episode of What We Do in the Shadows (to the extent a show as loopy as this one can ever be said to be ordinary). Instead, it feels a little like “Asspen” from South Park, an incredibly entertaining, over the top prestiche to a certain brand of feel-good sports movies and 80s and 90s genre flicks.
It totally works for Matt Berry’s comic talents and for the sensibilities of the show. There’s something so amusing about Lazlo taking on the role of “Johnny Daytona -- human bartender guy” in Pennsylvania, trying to help the local volleyball team afford to go to state, and having an understated admirer in the form of his caring coworker. That alone would have been a fun chance for the show to riff on some of the sillier tropes of this type of “On the Run” story.
But that humor is magnified by the supreme silliness of Lazlo's vampiric and other bizarre sensibilities. The fact that he sleeps in a giant freezer, covers all the mirrors, and use his magic powers to fix jukeboxes and assist local volleyball teams is a hoot. The way it coincides with his feud with the creatively named “Jim the Vampire”, which isn’t over some historical grudge, but rather an unpaid beach rental, adds to the mundane hilarity of the episode. And the fact that Lazlo’s disguise (which works!) is just a pair of blue jeans and a toothpick is the height of humorous absurdity.
The scenes where Berry and Hamill share the frame are especially great. Hamill uses his Armin Zola voice for Jim the Vampire, and his scenery-chewing is delightful. The way that both of them talk about drinking “human alcohol beer” and toss it over their shoulders makes for an enjoyable farce. And their bitter fight, resolved over the pain to the girls’ volleyball fortunes and a big mouth billy bass, is fantastic.
The other material in the episode is lots of fun as well. Colin Robinson trying to feed via the awkwardness of the rejected kiss is entertaining. The gags about people falling into sinkholes makes for some great physical humor. And the tags, with Lazlo roleplaying as JOhnny Daytona after that “carefree lifestyle” changed him, and Jim the Vampire realizing he’s been tricked via this “mechanical turk” are great.
Overall, a fun and weird but delightful episode.
Before I saw this movie for the first time, I assumed it would be a very dark drama about some pretty messed up shit. Instead, it is a very hilarious drama about some pretty messed up shit. The fact that they couldn't be blatant about their jokes makes them even funnier. I probably didn't catch them all the first time, or even this time maybe. Repeat viewing is worth it here for sure.
Not to mention that all the actors are great in this. I can't even believe that Lolita is played by an actual 14 year old. She makes the role perfect and somehow doesn't look bad next to James Mason or Peter Sellers. By the end of the movie, you really start getting into the seriousness of what is going on, while still having the jokes here and there. And somehow they make you sorta sympathizes with a terribly awful relationship.
My only negative is that they run it a bit too long. It feels like we take a long time to get to the end, but then suddenly jump forward years in one scene. Yet, for some reason we don't get the feeling that time has jumped. Don't get me wrong though, there isn't a scene that I think is bad in here. I think you should make sure you see this one for sure.
Best to watch with friends, but not parents or something. That'd be weird.
[7.6/10] Chuck McGill once described his brother with a law degree as the equivalent of “a chimp with a machine gun.” That conjures a particular image -- one of recklessness and harm via a device far beyond the comprehension or abilities of its user. As Lalo (Tony Dalton) showed us in the tunnel, you don’t need to have perfect aim or a good line of sight to do some serious damage with that sort of tool at your disposal.
But I never bought that line of thinking. Jimmy (Bob Odenkirk) was born to color outside the lines, but the early seasons of Better Call Saul convinced me that with the right guidance, the right supervision, the right singing cricket on his shoulder, he could have used his powers for good. The early stages of the Sandpiper case seemed to suggest that, where his con artist ways could be used to benefit a defrauded group of senior citizens (and, admittedly, feather his own nest in the process). Given the bad blood between the McGill brothers, that wasn’t meant to be, and we’ve seen Jimmy’s soul gradually darken over the course of five seasons instead.
Maybe it’s still possible, though, in the guise of a professional pantsuit and a curled ponytail in lieu of a loud blazer and billboard-ready wink. Those same early seasons slowly came to suggest that Kim was an equally formidable con artist as Jimmy, just one whose conscience held her back from the worst of his indulgence.
What if she had the right target though -- a smug man who’s “in love with himself” and treated Kim (Rhea Seehorn) poorly on multiple occasions? What if she had a just cause -- enough money to fund a pro bono practice that could give the indigent the type of representation that only the wealthy can typically afford? And what if there would be no harm to forcing the result -- a Sandpiper settlement that may come in a few dollars shorter than expected, but would give the octogenarian beneficiaries their money now, when they can still use it.
For seasons now, fans and critics like me have posited Kim as the last thing keeping Jimmy McGill from becoming Saul Goodman. What if we were wrong? What if the tie to Kim that seemed to be the last thing holding Jimmy back from descending irrevocably into his “Better Call Saul” guise was, in actuality, the tie that saw Jimmy inadvertently dragging Kim down into that darkness with him.
Jimmy himself certainly seems to think so. Maybe it’s the lingering PTSD or the warning from Mike (Jonathan Banks) in “Bagman” that Jimmy had put Kim into the line of fire. Whatever the cause, Jimmy seems ready to extricate himself from this relationship, not because he loves Kim any less, but because he’s realizing that he might be bad for her. The catch is that, until the end, Jimmy understandably believes the threat is coming from the cartel, and his other probable crossed lines, that might put this poor woman whose only sin is her loyalty to him in more danger.
And why wouldn’t he? The cartel half of “Something Unforgivable” posits the ongoing web of bad blood and conflicting business interests among Lalo, Gus (Giancarlo Esposito), Juan Bolsa (Javier Grajeda), and Don Eladio (Steven Bauer) as something volatile and quick to turn deadly. The confrontation between Lalo and those sent to assassinate him takes out old men, it takes out women, it takes out foot soldiers so young they’re practically kids. It’s reasonable to be afraid of what could become collateral damage next.
Granted, it seems like nothing in this world could stop Lalo from coming at his enemies and evading any attempts to neutralize him. The character has been a more than welcome presence in season 5, and Dalton has brought a mix of mirth and menace to the role not seen since Mark Hamill’s take on the Joker. But his escape from a host of assassins who are, on Fring’s account, the best at what they do, starts to make him feel superhuman in the way his ceiling-leap last season did.
Lalo has proven himself to be exceedingly smart, prepared, and aware of what kind of business he’s in. So it’s not crazy to think he could be ready for something like this. Still, his single-handedly taking out a squad of killers with machine guns despite starting with little more than a hot pan full of oil starts to strain credulity and weakens the one bit of real fireworks the episode has to offer.
That said, the danger puts a target on Nacho’s (Michael Mando) back. He, more than anyone, has been caught in that web for a long time now. Mike once again wants to give him a reprieve, get him out of there before something bad happens. But as Gus surveys the burned wreckage of one his restaurants, his tone and tenor say this is a man who’s invested too much in Nacho Varga to spare him at a time when he may be rising up in Don Eladio’s empire and the pecking order of Gus’s rivals.
That leaves Nacho having to play both sides whilst higher up the food chain. When Lalo coaches him up for winning the top spot in the Salamanca crew from Don Eladio, saying that the business needs someone “steady” right now, you can see him mulling the possibilities. At the same time, you can see how he’s damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Failing to earn that spot may leave him much more expendable to both the Salamancas and to Gus. But gaining it just raises the stakes in his double-agent routine, making his tenuous position between two murderous crime bosses that much more precarious.
The attack on Lalo’s compound, which Nacho conspicuously managed to escape from, puts him in Lalo’s crosshairs. With all the dramatics of the last two episodes, “Something Unforgivable” is more of a denouement for this season, and a setup for the next one, that a heart-pumping hour of television in and of itself. As setup though, Lalo’s “I thought he was dead” revenge quest is an exciting one, that puts literally every other major character on the show in danger.
Lalo’s smart enough to suspect that Nacho had something to do with the attempt on his life. His disdain for Gus is well-documented. He has unfinished business with Mike after sparks flew in last season’s finale. He already thinks Saul might have sold him out given last week’s thrilling stand off. And Kim is officially on the cartel’s radar, after not only identifying herself to Lalo in “Bagman”, but telling him off to his face in the next episode. As Better Call Saul puts its pieces into place for its final season, it’s left each of its major players in potentially mortal danger.
The only character of significance who’s managed to avoid that sword of Damocles is Howard Hamlin. But he may be staring down the barrel of the only thing scarier than an enraged Lalo -- Kim Wexler with a righteous cause and a lack of scruples.
All this time we thought we were watching the slow descent of Jimmy McGill into Saul Goodman, worried that he would drag Kim down with him. Maybe he has, only not in the way any of us were expecting. Just as the firefight on the Salamanca compound seems to be setting up a series of confrontations in season 6 more than it’s closing out the cartel story in season 5, Kim’s choices here seem to be setting up the final, major job that she and her newly-christened husband will pull in the show’s final batch of episodes.
Her plan to trick or coax or outright fabricate Howard committing some unforgivable crime would bring the show full circle. It would set Kim and Jimmy against the show’s fake out villain from its first season. It would give Kim revenge on the man who took his beefs against Jimmy and generally frustrations out on her despite all her good, hard work. It would wrap up the Sandpiper case that drove so much of Jimmy’s actions in the early going. Better Call Saul is rarely so neat or tidy, but the climax of the schemes the husband and wife adorably toss around under the covers would create a bookend for the show as it makes its final lap.
But it would also darken Kim’s soul to an extent few expected or would wish. That includes Jimmy, who seems aghast that his partner is serious about this. We’ve seen Kim cross lines before, from pulling simple cons for fun, to trying more complex schemes to help her practice, to her complicity in Jimmy’s efforts against his brother, to her transgressions on behalf of Mr. Acker in the shadow of Mesa Verde’s call center.
It’s easy to see those as the road to hell paved with good intentions, one greased, however intentionally or inadvertently, by Saul’s bad influence on her. Kim herself, however, rejects this hypothesis when it’s offered by Howard. She insists, as she should, that she’s someone who makes her own choices. We’re all a product of the people we interact with, the people we spend our lives with. But Kim has felt a fire and a thrill from her opportunities to color outside the lines just as Jimmy has, and maybe the only mistake was in thinking that she would hold onto her conscience in the shadow of his worst transgressions rather than finding her own path in the darkness.
Perhaps, instead, she will become what Jimmy seemed poised to become, but through familial grievances and his perceived universe of slights, was doomed to fall short of -- a champion who does bad things for good ends. Season 5 of Better Call Saul is where Saul Goodman, the amoral advocate we would come to know on Breaking Bad, was born and started to flourish. But it may also be the birth of a new Kim Wexler, a fallen angel ready to slay the wicked in the name of the good, as the devil on her shoulder starts to wonder, and regret, what he’s done.
“We lay my love and I, beneath the weeping willow. But now alone I lie and weep beside the tree. Singing "Oh willow waly" by the tree that weeps with me. Singing "Oh willow waly" till my lover return to me. We lay my love and I beneath the weeping willow. A broken heart have I. Oh willow I die, oh willow I die…”
‘The Innocents’ is pure terror. The best horror movie experience I had in awhile, especially watching this in the dark which scared me stiff. When your imagination plays a massive part in filling in the blanks. The movie isn’t just loud noises for cheap thrills, but tackles the feeling of paranoia and the unexplained through atmosphere - filmed in a moody and yet beautiful black and white.
Everything from the opening scene which was a black screen with a child singing a song. Keep in my mind I was watching this in the dark, so when the screen went dark and the song started, I was creeped out. Perfectly sets up the mood for the movie.
Terrific performances from Deborah Kerr and the two children, Martin Stephens and Pamela Franklin. The cinematography is so crisp in detail while exhibiting shadows and natural light that naturally creates the gothic tone. I wouldn’t even call this a ghost movie, just a movie about the effects of sexual abuse, or a metaphorical look on sexual repression. Considering this came out in the early 60’s, I’m surprised this was tackled, intentional or not.
I won’t say anymore. Go and check it out.
Overall rating: 60’s gothic horror at its best.
Happy Halloween everyone!
[6.9/10] The Innocents is a number of good scares in search of a better movie. Director Jack Clayton and his crew construct plenty of sequences that chill the spine, shots that make your skin crawl, and moments to make the hair on the back of your neck stand up. But the production is rife with overwrought performances, laughable dialogue, and a story that veers between lackadaisical to nonsensical, with occasional detours of being downright dull.
It’s the sort of film that would work better if all the lines were replaced with subtitles, or really just omitted altogether. Clayton and company do well at setting a mood, one where nothing is explicitly wrong, but it feels like some spectre might be lurking just around the corner. But all of that goes to pot once the governess or the housekeeper or the titular young brother in sister have some overblown reaction to it all that punctures the creepy atmosphere and devolves into rank melodrama.
Some of that is just the gulf of time proving itself impassable for someone born decades after this movie’s release. Deborah Kerr’s frantic, overly mannered delivery verges on the comical in places. It’s the sort of thing I can intellectually accept as a choice and the style of the time, but which simply can’t move me amid the rampant artifice of it all, and which undermines the other unsettling horror elements that make up the film.
Granted, Kerr and her fellow cast members are saddled with some truly ridiculous lines of dialogue. The feature is marbled with emotional exposition and flat declarations of what did or didn’t happen. When Clayton allows the film’s imagery and sound to take over, there’s an elegant, understated terror to the whole ordeal. But when any of the film’s central figures tries to comment on the proceedings, to describe their own state of mind, the whole thing falls apart into purple prose and unnatural speeches that, in my heart of hearts, I want to ascribe to William Archibald rather than Truman Capote.
Still, the performances are no great shakes. Kerr quivers and mawps and speaks ever so delicately about this and that. The Innocents largely rests on her shoulders, and her exaggerated reactions to everything, whether in delighted rapture or petrifying terror, render many, if not most, of the film’s high drama moments thoroughly unavailing. The same goes for the kids, who acquit themselves well enough for child actors (particularly Martin Stephens in the film’s last reel), but who more often come off as annoying or silly when the movie seems to be trying for creepy.
By the same token, in between its big scares, The Innocents is positively languid. The film plays understandably coy about what’s really going on with all the unnerving happenings around the country estate where Miss Giddens has been sent to look after her benefactor’s young niece and nephew. But it drags its feet between reveals, reducing itself to long, speculative exposition dumps, describing things the viewer’s already witnessed firsthand, and dull, elongated stretches.
And even when the film wants to put its cards on the table and try to convince the audience that the children are possessed by their deceased former governess and vallet, the reasons behind Miss Gibbons’s plans and rules for how to address it make little sense. Having decided that Miles and Flora are being controlled from beyond the grave, she decides that she simply needs to get them to admit that’s what’s happening or ferry them away from the manor and it’ll all go away. Maybe there’s some late 1800s ghost lore that just doesn't track with our modern mythos, and I’m willing to take the movie’s rules as a find them, but it still scans as an odd approach to a suspected haunting.
Granted, one of the films strengths is its ambiguity over whether the spooks and spine-tingling images we see through Miss Giddens’ eyes are real or the product of mental instability and delusion. For a production from a much more chaste era, The Innocents adds a psychological layer to its horror by lacing the film with the strain of repressed or abusive sexuality. On the one hand, it’s possible to read the film as a metaphor for child abuse, with Miss Giddens and Mrs. Grose trying to address (or sweep under the rug) horrors visited upon the children by their former caretakers, with our protagonist seeing an admission of what happened as the first step toward treatment and healing.
But on the other, it’s possible to read the entire ordeal as a mental unraveling of Miss Giddens, spurred by her own presumably repressed upbringing as the daughter of a country parson. There’s a tension in the film, between the sort of morally upstanding, prim and proper of Miss Giddens herself, and the combination of the Uncle’s “I’m too busy chasing skirts in London to look after my wards” position and the tale of the lascivious valet and governess who carried on their illicit affair while the children were aware. It’s not a far leap to take that tension, extrapolate it to a shock that a pair of children’s innocence would be corrupted by exposure to such licentiousness, and have that send Miss Giddens into a hallucinatory frenzy.
Still, whether her encounters with spooks and spirits are real or imagined, they’re the best part of the film. The Innocents is at its best when it’s not trying to make sense of its jumbled up plot, but rather trafficking in sheer chill factor. Cinematographer Freddie Francis finds engaging ways to block and frame Miss Giddens, often putting her in the foreground while one of her young chargers, a disquieting phantom, or simply a shadow lurks eerily in the background. It tracks that Francis would go on to work with David Lynch, as there’s a shared, unsettling dimension to how the film is shot and posed.
At the same time, the sound design firmly aids in the creep factor. Whether it’s the simple, quiet echo of Miss Giddens’s footsteps as she ascends a tower staircase, or the disturbing tunes sung in the din of the house, or the combinations of whispers and hums in heightened moments that add to the sense of dysphoria, the reason not to mute this film and just enjoy its sterling visuals is the way those aural components of the movie heighten its terror.
That’s the rub of The Innocents. When it simply wants to scare you, it uses all the tools in its toolbox with a virtuoso’s precision, culminating in a final act set piece that brings its slow bubbling horror to a frothing boil. But when it wants to convey character, or deliver important details, or simply convey what its major personalities are thinking or feeling, it resorts to cartoonish approaches in dialogue and delivery that weaken the audience’s ability to feel for anyone trapped in that well-constructed nightmare. There’s enough craft, and enough going on under the hood, to make the film worth watching and appreciating, but not enough of core components like character or performance or writing to make it truly great.
The first thing you need to know about this film is that Terry Gilliam is the director. Most of his films would be what I consider to be an epic. They start in one place and you feel as if you've gone on a wild ride (for better or worse) while ending up in a completely different place.
If Monty Python, The Fisher King, The Imaginarium of Dr. Pernassus and Brazil had a baby it would be this film. It quite reminded me of Brazil in that (especially later in the film) it had the feel of a wild and giant production (although I liked this film far better than that film). There was a dreamy feel to this film that was not unlike that of Pernassus. There was the question of delusion that was central in Fisher King. And in Jonathan Pryce's performance I could easily see John Cleese if the film were to have a more comedic slant to it (this is not to say that there wasn't comedy in the film). EDIT* It turns out that Cleese was in fact supposed to be in the film when they attempted to make it in 1997.
I think what stands out the most in Gilliam's work is just how unique of a story teller he is. While not all of his films work for me I can always appreciate the ambition that he has in taking on these project. It always helps to get the kind of stellar performances that were delivered by Pryce and Adam Driver.
follow me at https://IHateBadMovies.com or faceook page IHateBadMovies
The flashbacks was the best addition to this season, getting to see the Donovan’s siblings lives back then made this season interesting. We finally saw Ray’s emotions and the backstory!
I don’t know why Ray lied to Molly, he always knew his sister was pregnant when she committed suicide. It was sad to see his realization who the father was and that he forced her to go to work at his house. Ray will need many more therapy sessions after this. But how come Mickey didn’t know his daughter was pregnant? I guess he really doesn’t care about his children, that’s the only way to explain this plot hole.
I wish Ray didn’t kill Sullivan so quickly, I would have loved to hear more than, “Back then...”
I’m glad Smitty is dead. He was so annoying.
“Every one of your children, Mick ... left alone to be preyed on by wild fucking animals.” Devastating. Mickey Donovan is one of worst tv father of all time. I don’t get why he is still alive. I understand that it’s great to have John Voight on your show but it’s just so ridiculous how Mickey keeps getting away.
I'm happy Daryll got his revenge but he shouldn’t just blame Mickey, it’s his fault that he believed him.
Wonder how long they can keep the show going without the Donovans going to prison. So many dead bodies.
This movie shows in a very good way how the next virus outbreak that will be just as big or maybe even bigger as the Spanish Flu is gonna happen in the 21th century. And believe me, sooner or later IT WILL HAPPEN.
I liked the electronic music that was playing at the beginning of the movie. It had sort of an panicked tone to it that together with the people who where getting sick and dying set a thrilling tone to the first part of the movie.
I found the movie to be very realistic. Jude Law character was spot-on. When there is gonna be an outbreak we will see people on the internet (who have no medical training whatsoever) who think they have found the cure and millions of people will listen to them. There will be millions of people who stop going to work, who stay at home and avoid contact with anyone. Others will do whatever they can to get their hands on a vaccination, even if that means killing someone else.
I liked the fact that we got to see the story from so many different angles. It really gave an overview of the entire situation and what the virus had for an impact on all the people involved.
The end of the movie was a bit disappointing. In my opinion that could have been a lot better. But overall i find this movie to be really good.
LIFF33 2019 #2
Time to spill the beans…’The Lighthouse’ is a masterpiece! I loved loved loved loved it! I loved every minute of it. One of my favorite movies of 2019 and I honestly don’t think anything can top it. A slow descent into madness that creeps into your subconscious and won’t be leaving anytime soon.
From the very first frame, I immediately knew this was going to be special. I was hooked throughout until the end credits.
Willem Dafoe and Robert Pattinson both deliver career defining performances. They play off each others insanity beautifully. I could tell just from the accents and dialect that plenty of homework went into making an authentic portrayal of the time.
Robert Pattinson is fantastic as a quiet and private lighthouse keeper that witness the madness slowly unfolding, but also feeds the audiences curiosity on revealing the strange happenings on the island. Pattinson is a chameleon when it comes to portraying characters.
Willem Dafoe, on the other hand, was mesmerizing as the old sea dog captain with a love for farting. His long and insane monologues are the main highlights, because it was so electrifying to watch it was hard not be captivated. He’s strict and often unpredictable, but once you see it, you won’t forget it.
I hope Robert Eggers continues making horror movies in the future, because right now he’s one of the best living directors working today. The slow-burn tension and lack of conventional scares seems to be his trademark so far. Every choice he made was so carefully thought out and the results is masterful. According to Eggers, they actually built a lighthouse from scratch and everything we see, including the weather, is genuine. Even if some tricky was used, it was so seamless I couldn’t tell what was fake.
I loved how the movie was shot; the dim black-and-white with the claustrophobic aspect ratio, giving it the appearance of a silent film born like a German expressionism - something you would’ve mistaken for a 1920/30’s horror folklore. Perfectly captures the time period and the overall dread. You really do feel cut off from the outside world and abandoned on this spectral-like island, and this black sheet of cloud strongly looming over the two men. A dark force in all directions, unseen but very eerie. The cold and heartless weather is a character itself. A big bully with salty intentions.
I adored the use of lighting through out, as the only light source is either natural light during daytime or candle lit lanterns, which cast many shadows that adds to the unease. There’s some gorgeous looking cinematography on display here. Seriously, even as am writing this right now I can memorize every single frame of this strange nightmare of a film. Absolutely breathtaking.
While the movie is mainly horror, but there is comedy sprinkled throughout that was actually pretty hilarious. Everything from Dafoe farting and some creative insults the characters would often spit at each other, which would later expand into long monologues that I sat back and watch in awe with a stupid grin on my face, because how something so silly can be so poetic. Never have I seen a movie that perfectly balances more than one genre so fluently. You can laugh at the moments where it’s suppose to be funny, but also take it seriously whenever it’s suppose to be taken seriously, which is sometimes all in one scene. The writing from Eggers is so excellent.
After only one viewing there was a lot I could easily dissect in terms of interpretation. There's masculinity and Greek mythology imagery that demonstrates a striking sense of power. There’s also a certain idea of sexuality being a sacred thing and the frustration it may bring. Or maybe it’s just a simple story about two guys on a rock getting drunk and then getting even drunker while holding each other until they drift off to sleep.
Overall rating: One of the best looking horror comedies of 2019.
I love Elvis Presley as a singer, but his movies definitely vary in quality. Some are fairly enjoyable, while others are just dreadful. This was actually ok. (Of course, I may be comparing it to "Harum Scarum... a dreadful film that I saw the other day. A three hour epic of a sponge would have been more exciting than THAT film.)
Elvis films seem to fit into three categories: The fairly enjoyable rom-com musicals that the Colonel wanted him in: G.I Blues, Roustabout, Blue Hawaii...
The boring, and utterly dull (usually westerns): Love Me Tender, Flaming Star, Harum Scarum...
Or the one film that was a drama, but was actually decent: King Creole.
This film fits into Colonel Tom Parker's category, but I have to admit, I'd much rather watch those ones than the dull attempts at westerns or dramas. This doesn't mean for one second that the Colonel was doing good by sticking him in these films. Had he allowed him to star in "West Side Story", or "A Star Is Born" (as he was offered!)... Or more films like "King Creole", then maybe Elvis's acting career would've turned out better. But we can't dwell on such things. After all, if it wasn't for the downside of his filming career, we wouldn't have had the wonderful '68 Comeback, and his fantastic tours from 1969-1977.
The songs in this film are fantastic. The highlight is one of the best songs Elvis recorded: "All That I Am."
And the whole film is a breath of fresh air compared to the awful "Harum Scarum". It's not his best film, even among the rom-coms, but it's still enjoyable to watch once or twice.
Dang. That was a good time. I had such low expectations. The trailer was boring in spite of the fact that it features an actress I enjoy. I wasn't seeing advertising for it when I saw it in theatres so i skipped it. Now however it's getting featured status so I figured I'd give it a shot. I was bloody impressed. I thought it would be a cheesy film about a girl losing weight by doing a marathon. But I like everyone so much. Brittany was so heartfelt.
This is the second movie based on a real person I've seen this year (Blinded by the Light) and both times I'm not sure I knew it was based on a real person. They both managed to impress me. It's just a lovely thing both movies. I also liked the supporting cast. They really filled out the world and her relationships even though as a character Brittany tends to shut people out I really kept rooting for her to eventually let them in. Even Catherine who is an on and off character managed to endear herself. There's heartache and heartbreak as a viewer watching Brittany go through her ups and downs. Highly recommend everyone check this out if you can.
There are many reasons why this film will always be a Christmas Classic. It's filled with exactly the right ingredients for the whole family to enjoy year after year forever more. The story is simple: A huge family go on holiday, and carelessly leave their son Kevin behind. While home alone, Kevin uses booby traps to fight off two burglars.
The acting by all members of the cast is spot on. They all play a part to make the unrealistic seem believable. We really believe that the parents have forgotten about Kevin until the mother suddenly remembers that he's not there. Her reaction was spot on: Not overdramatic, but believably startled.
I always forget about John Candy's appearance in this film and he will guarantee to make you smile in any movie. So it's always a lovely surprise to see him.
Janet Hirshenson and Jane Jenkins did an amazing job at casting the two burglars, played by Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern. They couldn't be more right for the part. They provided most of the silly slapstick, which was always bound to win me over.
It goes without saying that Macauley Culkin is a phenomenal actor. I'm NOT gonna use the phrase "for his age", because that's patronising and he is as equally as talented as all the other adult actors in the film. He is fantastic throughout but there was one shot that stood out for me. He was carrying many bags of shopping home, and all the bags tear at the bottom, and everything falls on the floor at once. He breaks the fourth wall and looks directly into the camera, and his arms drop to the side. This shot alone demonstrates how incredible he is as a comedian and how skilled he is as an actor. No other actor or comedian could have played this shot so well, especially as the camera is quite a distance from him. Oliver Hardy would've applauded that scene. However Macauley does a fantastic job throughout the film. Not just this scene. He is truly remarkable.
The music used throughout this film really makes you feel in the festive spirit. It's an emotionally uplifting ending, as any decent Christmas film is. The whole film is heartwarming and it's absolutely a must watch movie. I will always love it, and I'll be watching it every year for the rest of my life.
This was a great take on a dark past, bringing comedy and satire to the forefront, and I absolutely loved it! While being comedic, there are many emotional parts to the film, which I was rather surprised to see. One moment you're laughing hard, the next you're on the edge of balling your eyes out. I never would have expected to see a film quite like this done on Nazi Germany, it was very well made.
With this being Roman's first-ever professional acting job, I was incredibly impressed - he is awesome, and I certainly look forward to his next project(s). He was able to capture the rollercoaster of emotions, thoughts and feelings that may be going through a child growing up in Nazi Germany—who is being told who is okay and who is not—with ease. Taika never fails to please me with his work, and Stephen is a very funny actor. The way that Hitler was mocked through Taika really adds into the thought that not everyone is as strong as they are said to be. Thomasin brings in lots of emotion, and Roman just blows the film out of the park.
Seeing it for my 7th time, I think I'd probably upgrade this from one of the best films of 2019 to one of the best films of the decade.
I shall certainly be seeing this several more times, and I definitely recommend it.
So, I watched this much nominated, critically lauded, friend favoured, top listed Christmas movie today, for the first time. Like CASABLANCA, if you've never seen these movie intentionally, you will be able to reconstruct them from the many clips that have been featured over the years. I was surprised to know so much of it and the music associated with it. Judy Garland gives a wonderful performance with the mature vocal talent belying her age and Margaret O'Brien is a cherubic, little scene stealer. The story has an odd counterpoint of youthful obsessions with frivolous romance and fearful unease, (the Halloween antics, the brutishness of some of the encounters and Tooti's obsession with death were a little sobering but the hopefulness of being in love are the enduring memories). Even this early version of "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" is more hope in the midst of sorrow than merriment. (Two, later, popular, renditions of the song each changed the lyrics slightly, which eventually eradicating it's sorrowful under-themes, turning it into the version we most commonly sing today). Even though, during the movie, they had an uneasy working relationship, a year after the movie's release Judy Garland (who's birth name was Francis Ethel Gumm - who knew?) married Vincente Minnelli. Though short lived, that marriage gave us Lisa Minnelli, for whom we are grateful. I've procrastinated giving my rating of this film, because I have friends who cite this as their favourite Christmas movie - so a 10. I hope they will forgive me if I give it a 7.9 (good with highlights) out of 10 (I just wasn't seeing/feeling a 10 (I apologize). [Classic Romantic Musical]
I am going to assume that anyone reading this already knows that the film is about a couple going through the divorce process (if you didn't know this you find out right at the beginning). Halfway through the film I asked myself why the film wasn't called "Divorce Story" as the story is really about the difficulty that families face when a relationship falls apart. After mulling this over for a day or so I think I realized the answer. The film isn't about divorce as much as it is about relationships. In the film the couple doesn't seem to have problems that couldn't be worked out. In the opening sequence we see that there is actually a lot that they like about each other. As the film plays on we see that there is a fair amount of baggage that each of them has.
And that's where the heart of the film is. Much of the baggage are things that the characters have carried around in silence and thus they were allowed to grow and mutate internally. The film isn't so much a cautionary tale about divorce as it is a cautionary tale about relationships. The key to the film was said by Alan Alda's character in the middle of the film: after all of this is said and done you're still going to have to work this out between the two of you. So yes, the repressed feelings ended up being spoken by lawyers at the cost of hundreds of dollars an hour. And yes, when it was all said and done they did have to learn how to get along. But the real problem is that they had not learned to talk to each other years before and they were just starting to learn how to do it when the dust settled. What if they had learned how to do so years before?
It is wonderful to see A-list hollywood actors doing adult dramas again. Adam Driver has really been on a role with some fantastic films (including the criminally unseen Paterson). This wasn't the most entertaining Baumbach movie that I've seen but it may be the most intelligent (and in some ways, the most important). The writing and acting are superb.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHateBadMovies.
Jimmy Hoffa: “I heard you paint houses.”
Frank Sheeran: “Yes, I do.”
It’s a great day when you get to see a new Martin Scorsese movie, but a new gangster movie staring some of one of the greatest actors that have ever bless cinema, now that’s killing two birds with one bullet. I’ve said this many times before, but whenever Scorsese releases a new movie - I’m there, as I have 100% faith he will deliver something so crafted in style where his passion to create a fresh new experience for audience to slip right back into loving movies. And Scorsese has made another masterpiece.
‘The Irishman’ is an old school masterpiece. A sweeping epic that’s so rich and timely through it’s presentation that I was reminded of the likes of Coppola and Leone. Everything from the razor sharp back and forward conversations with characters, long takes, and the fantastic use of music that helps create the setting and time period.
Now let me talk about the visual effects in the movie - something that everyone including Scorsese himself was worried about. While at first it was a bit uncanny to see fresh faces from De Niro, Pacino and Pesci. The movie has a difficult task, because the entire runtime takes place in the past and occasionally it will cut back to a present day/older De Niro, aka what he looks like now, so it’s so easy to judge on the cgi wizardry. I can safely say you really get use to it after awhile and doesn’t distract from the amazing performances, as I could still feel the emotion from their faces. I bought into it and the evolution of the technical is absolutely astonishment.
Robert De Niro plays a cold, yet charismatic gangster, Frank Sheeran - a friend of Jimmy Hoffa. He follows orders to kill and dose it without a sweat. His children are afraid of him and have seen both sides of him, which would later hit him harder than a million ton of bricks. He doesn’t need to say or do anything to express the characters thoughts and feelings. Fantastic as usual.
Al Pacino plays a loud month Jimmy Hoffa that’s a huge ball of energy and reeks of desperation, which Pacino portrays beautifully. From ‘Dog Day Afternoon’, to this, it’s amazing how Pacino never lost that fiery energy that makes him so captivating to watch. The fact he’s never been in a Scorsese movie baffles me, but am loving his comeback recently.
Joe Pesci plays Russell Bufalino, a silent and collective man who sniffs out trouble and takes care of “business”. If you expect to see the nut job Pesci, then think again. He’s brilliant in the movie. It’s great seeing Pesci back after disappearing from the spotlight for a couple of years, and it’s almost like he never left at all.
With the run time of 3 hours and 29 minutes, not a single frame felt pointless. At times the length was felt, but I was never bored. Thelma Schoonmaker, the editor of Scorsese movies is a legend and needs no introduction. Without spoiling anything, but there’s an incredible scene involving a woman terrified to turn the car engine on as the camera lingers on a shot of keys hanging in the ignition waiting to be turned. When she dose there’s a sharp cut to an exploding vehicle (not hers) with the engine roaring as the sound affect. The most tense scene in the entire movie.
And the cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto was excellent with the use of color that made it visually striking.
Martin Scorsese, the man who revived the gangster genre for what it is and now he’s the one to bury it. The shot outs are often unexpected and messy - basically violence in general. Almost similar to ‘Once Upon a Time In Hollywood’, because there’s an underlining message of age and the modern generation slipping through as the old ways ain't the same anymore. You are taken through a journey of a mobster from youth to old age.
Overall rating: Cinema at its finest. I’m just in awe of the thought we got a movie like this where no other studio wouldn’t dare to touch it for some reason. What an experience.
Disney’s 2019 version of Aladdin provides us with pleasant surprises and a few hiccups along the ride on the magic carpet. Agrabah looks amazing, you totally feel the Arabian vibe and still is a city with more depth then in the original animated movie with more cultures mixed into one. Jasmine has a well written storyline which is not only fitting for the time we live in now, it’s also very in depth and gives her even more of an edge. She truly outshines the animated Jasmine. Mena’s performance is almost identical to the original. Great acting and good looks. Although I was more anticipated for the Genie’s performance, it was Jafar who surprised me, but not always in a good way. I liked this style and Jafar being younger and more appealing. Marwan showed us great acting by letting us feel Jafar truly is dangerous. What I missed though are iconic moments the animated movie showed us like turning into a snake, make genie lift up the castle and being the old poor man who tricks Aladdin into the cave of wonders, which wasn’t all that wonderous to me at all. The feeling of the cave popping up from the sand was something I really missed, the interior though is flawless and well put together. Aladdin started of stronger then it ended but overall, this new adaptation left me ‘Speechless’ thanks to its wonderful cast, set design and refreshing plots.
Oldboy is a Fantastic movie! This is a revenge film about a man named Oh Dae-Su, Played brilliantly by Choi Min-sik, who seeks revenge after being trapped in a cell for 15 years. After being released randomly with nothing more than lots of money and a phone, he must find out who did this and why this all occured.
The basic gist is that a variety of violent set pieces occur for him to find out who did all this to him. One of the most famous scenes in cinema come from this movie, THE one-take fight scene in the hall way. It has a place in cinematic history and for good reason. The co-ordination with the stunt team, camera man and main actors must have been pain staking and I can appreciate the level of detail needed to really portray the visceral nature of the scene.
Choi Min-Sik, again, was a stand out performance. He's able to portray two sides of the character, the drunken father, as well as, the harden prisoner. The supporting actors also did a fantastic job with each performance. Chan-wook Park was able to get an emotional performance for each of the actors and that has got to be commended.
The cinematography and lighting was superb with the outside being more saturated and lively in comparison to the dingy and claustrophobic environments of the interior. The plot was also fantastic, with the ending being particularly surprising and disturbing. The writing was fantastic and each character was well-developed and well-written.
This movie is a master piece in cinema. And if you appreciate film as an art form, you have to watch this movie.
It's easy to call Oldboy a movie about a revenge. It is, after all. Lee Woo-Jin wants revenge on Oh Dae-Su, Oh Dae-Su doesn't realize it for much of the film, but he wants revenge on Lee Woo-Jin. And each man is changed tremendously in the process. Lee Woo-Jin is not the nerdy photographer we see in flashbacks, but a suave millionaire who exacts his plan in style. Oh Dae-Su is not the pudgy lech we see causing trouble at the police station in the film's beginning, but a fearless fighter and nigh-detective with real purpose in his life. And yet, neither of them is better for it.
What's striking is that the spark that begins this conflagration is so tiny. Works like Match Point and Breaking Bad have toyed with themes about tiny events and small coincidences having outsized effects on people's lives. But Oldboy outpaces them on this front. Oh Dae-Su is almost done with his school, moving on. When he sees two people fooling around by chance, he absent-mindedly repeats the gossip to his friend, barely even aware of who they were or what he was seeing. And this small action led to innumerable deaths, torture of the living both psychological and physical, and irrevocable changes for Oh Dae-Su and the lives of the people he's touched.
The hollow consumption of revenge has been examined by more than a few works, stretching back at least as far as The Scarlet Letter and the name-checked Count of Monte Cristo. But there's something bitterly ironic about all this fuss, the entire impetus from the film, beginning with some punk kid thoughtlessly relaying some vague information about something he saw but didn't really process, appreciate, or care about. The film drives the irony home by having Oh Dae-Su scribble a list of his possible enemies in his journals, and have his best friend mention the hundreds of people's lives he's ruined, and instead of the revenge stemming from his many misdeeds, it's from an offhand comment that, unbeknownst to him, had a butterfly effect.
I think that's why this film stays with me a bit. I think it's why, beyond the twists that give it a memorable "holy crap" moment, the bloody end stands out so much. Because the entire enterprise is framed as so empty, so fruitless, so damaging to all involved. Lee Woo-Jin is desperately trying to rectify the grief he feels for the loss of his sister and lover. And yet once he has, once his plan reaches fruition, he asks what he has to live for, imagines her death once more, and kills himself, laden with the realization that all his grand plans cannot heal those wounds.
And he puts Oh Dae-Su in the same position, realizing that his quest for revenge was just as much a sham, that he's done more damage by becoming this monster than if he'd simply died, or gone to live his life, or never bothered to go on this Herculean (or Batman-esque) attempt to get to the bottom of what happened. That's why at the end of the film, he asks to forget, he asks to wipe away the revenge, wipe away that past rather than let it linger with him, to clear his heart of the anger and scars inflicted upon him over the past fifteen years. And all of this, every last bit of it, begins with a brief word to a gossip that the original informant didn't even remember. The absurdity of it, the senselessness of it, lingers far beyond the shock of the film's reveals.
Despite that, it's a film that could run on plot alone. The story of a man trapped without knowledge of why or by whom, who is freed and sets out to find his captor, works at an elemental level to rope in the viewer. The opening segment depicting Oh Dae-Su's is enthralling as a psychological experiment, making us wonder what it would be like to go through something so isolating and dehumanizing. It puts us on Oh Dae-Su's side as we too wonder who would do this to him, why they did it, and hope that he gets his revenge. There's a relentless momentum to the film, that parcels out these discoveries well along the way, while guiding us through Oh Dae-Su's maladjusted reentry into the world.
Park Chan-Wook's direction adds to the atmosphere of the film with his deft camera work and creative choices in presentation. The film is bathed in dingy, Fincher-esque greens and blues that convey the grittiness of the proceedings. While the long-take fight scene is the most notable visual flourish in the film, Chan-Wook uses a great deal of creative framing to convey the emotions of his scenes, from layering Dae-Su, Woo-Jin, and the picture of Woo-Jin's sister in the same scene, to the transitions that blend one scene into another.
There are, of course, those shocking reveals. Watching the film for the second time takes away the jaw-dropping reaction at the true identity of Mi-do. (Who, on second watch, feels less developed than I remembered). But to the film's credit, the twist still works on rewatch because of the effect it has on Oh Dae-Su. His aghast response, his near insanity that once again throws him into vacillations between seeking pity and mercy and making threats and vows of retribution, while over the top, still has power even if the twist itself is muted.
There's a degree of magical realism to Oldboy. The idea that Lee Woo-Jin could pull off his convoluted scheme even with the seemingly unlimited resources at his disposal, that hypnosis could work as well and as clearly as depicted in the film, that all the players would play their roles as necessary for everything the fall the way they did is more than a little unrealistic. And yet it works because more than anything, Oldboy feels like a parable, a fable, rather than a story that aims towards realism.
It is a fable about revenge, taking whatever liberties with plausibility it needs to in order to thread the needle of its message, of the hollowed out emptiness of anger and revenge and its inability to make up for loss. The tragedy is amplified by the nigh-random incident that sets it all into motion. But Oldboy is about more than revenge. It's about the compromises we make, about the lies we tell ourselves, about the way small events can shift the tides of lives, and about the people we can become when the baser elements within us--The Monster and the Calculating Avengers--consume us.
I should preface this review by saying that, based on the rave reviews of friends (and strangers), I looked forward to seeing this movie, so, it has a faithful fan base who were of the opinion that the movie full justice to the book. The story was interesting (I was forewarned that tissues might be required). I truly believe that there is not another actor that better portrays the complete, self-sacrificing devotion of a man for a woman than does Milo Ventimiglia (I've believed in him since Jessie in GILMORE GIRLS). Amanda Seyfried is a harder sell for me, though, so that prejudice may have soured the love story for me somewhat. I did, however, learn a lot about racing and driving. The author certainly knew his stuff and was expert in spinning it's metaphors. The love of a man and the devotion of a dog were winsome. The treachery and heartbreak were moving, so the magic was not totally lost on me. I give this film a 7 (good) out of 10, and if you need further encouragement to see it, my bookish friend has told me, “Nancy, I would give it 11/10! I went to see it again. For me, it was about Enzo, the dog who wanted to be "people" and the incredible bond between dogs and their families.” So, there you have it! [Drama]
Hustlers is a funny feel good film you really do root for them even though they are committing crimes on these rich people to steal their money.
We first meet these people at a strip club in New York where they are strippers trying to make a living, but in order for them to make enough money they need to go into a bit of illegal business. We see these strippers as the hustle gets a lot harder resulting into drugging their clients in the film to try and get them to use their credit cards, signing cheques to spend money on them while hopefully not getting caught in the process, which the precaution is mainly these drugs that play on the clients memory while giving the clients a good time while being conned out of thousands by these strippers. Jennifer Lopez is hilarious the moment she breaks into a split after her strong independent liberating pole dancing scene is just Oscar worthy, which her character Ramona is the main instigator in this side hustling illegal business remaining in complete control over her friends that eventually becomes family.
Overall this movie is hilarious, dark, thrilling, well thought out and makes you overall feel good seeing these people come together to help each other in their hard time of need, where you find yourself rooting for these vulnerable strippers that are doing the illegal activities that they are in as you just want them out of this compromising position, then to be happy overall as close friends practically family too. Jennifer Lopez , Constance Wu, Cardi B, Keke Palmer who is especially hilarious, Trayce Lysette and Lili Reinhart has done an amazing job in there acting. Even though Lili’s character Annabelle could not stop throwing up randomly which was a bit weird and funny at the same time, also her sitting on Jennifer Lopez’s Lap was a bit bizarre too still, cute, warm, sweet and hilarious though just especially shows the close friendly family bond between Lili’s character Annabelle and Jennifer Lopez’s character Ramona too. I highly recommend you go and see it in a cinema as laughing together while also feeling the emotions the characters are faced with in their unpleasant experiences are just what cinemas are all about experiencing it as a community.
oh well, what can I say? It's not bad as critics say, at all.
The CGI animation needs to be really talked. It's groundbreaking for real, the way it was "filmed" and choreographed in Virtual Reality, giving a sense of real freedom on the gorgeous computer sets created. There are scenes where The Lion King simply throws at your face the ability of building scenes and shots that could easily be taken from a BBC Earth documentary.
But we need to talk about the elephant in the room, that every critic smashed, that is the bland voice animation in favor of the realism in the animals. It's not that bad for real. In fact, the movie conveniently hides some of the "would-be weird" mouth animation in some of the musical parts because of that carefulness and takes some risks with other scenes.
In terms of voice acting itself the real winners are Timon and Pumbaa, voiced by Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen respectively. They completely steal the show even with lines from the original and blends super nicely with the animals, especially Timon, because a meerkat is simply as funny real as animated. Chiwetel Ejiofor's Scar was more "villain" and less "cunning" like the original, putting a sense of danger with his plan and therefore the movie is a little darker because of that. The Be Prepared was transformed into a drama and suspense "song" revealing more the horrible plan that is to kill his brother and king.
Donald Glover and Beyoncé were a surprising combo, especially, because I thought I wouldn't be able to separate the superstar level, especially with Beyoncé, and pretend I wasn't seeing a lion being a world-star diva. But it works, most of the times. There are times where you say "oh that's so cute look at them" and there are times when you just imagine Nala belting in Coachella vibes for a hundred thousand people :sweat_smile:.
In terms of music production, it still maintains the quality associated with the original's soundtrack. Just from the beginning with Lebo M. returning with his full power for Circle of Life, but also passing with the obvious star vocalist Beyoncé creating a beautiful rendition of Nala's Can You Feel The Love Tonight with Donald Glover as well, showing that she has a trained and connected voice, using mostly the riffs and runs in head voice mixed with that Disney's touch to it. Also the new music from her, Spirit, was a nice surprise connecting two parts of the world of The Lion King. (Also keep for the credits to hear a new song from Elton John which was a nice addition as well).
These are the main parts of the movie. Some will like it, some will love it and some will prefer the original afterwards. But there's no denial that it wasn't just a bland remake. There were talent involved, from the CGI animators to the music producers and performers. It's a great tribute to one of the best animated movies of all time, showing a new modern light to it and introducing a beautiful story to the younger audience.
My dear Martin Scorsese, once again you prove in here why are you one of my favourites.
In The King of Comedy we follow Rupert Pupkin an obsessive fan of the very well known Jerry Langston a tv host and comedian that has a famous tv show. Rupert's daily life is all around Langston. He dreams about becoming one day like him. His goal is to be admired as a great comedian and he wants Langston to help him to get there.
The study of the character is amazing in here. Rupert is a lonely man, deep inside he is very sad, although he shows to be a very secure and happy man to everybody else. That's what makes this film into a fantastic masterpiece! Trying to understand certain behaviours of the human mind is not easy and nowadays the "celebrity obsession" is still present in our culture and there are people that are capable of doing anything for a moment of fame. But this is not in fact the main theme of this film. Deeper questions are related with it.
Without spoiling much there's one particular scene almost at the end of the film, Rupert's act at the tv talk show, that pretty sums up the whole film. Martin Scorsese was not only trying to show how the world of fame works but also, and most of all, what leads a man to a desperate situation. Troubled childhood and bad experiences in life may change some of the weakest minds and lead them into craziness.
When I was younger I used to watch a lot of Jerry Lewis films, both of my parents are big fans of him. His films are hilarious (I need to rewatch some of them btw). But the thing that most intrigued me was the fact that I already knew that Jerry Lewis would have a serious role in this film and not his usual comical tone that I already had seen. I was very curious about seeing this other side of him and I can say that he was great!
Some comedic actors turn out to be pretty great in dramatic roles. Jerry Lewis plays the arrogant scumbag that is tired of the spotlight. He is used to deal with a lot of guys like Rupert every day and treats his fans with disregard and he can't tolerate them.
Sandra Bernhard gives also a great psychotic performance as Masha, Rupert's friend that is also obsessed with Langston.
Martin Scorsese did a clever choice by choosing one of the most claimed comedy actors to play the role of a cynical comedy entertainer. But the guy who really shines in this film is Mr. Robert De Niro, what a magnificient performance! He perfectly portrays a person that is mentally unstable. Rupert lives in total isolation, he fantasizes all the time with situations at are real in his brain, he made himself believe in the lies that he created in his head.
No doubt, The King of Comedy is another masterpiece done by one of the finest man in the business.
[9.5/10] So apparently, this is just the year of Netflix shows delivering format-bending funeral episodes. (We still see you, BoJack Horseman.) But wow! More and more, I applaud ambition in T.V. and films -- productions that try something different and daring. Having an episode that’s a collection of long, unbroken shots is certainly that, and like its animated streaming service cousin, The Haunting of Hill House uses its form-breaking episode to deliver momentous personal and emotional turmoil and catharsis in one big dose.
The strongest part of “Two Storms” is not just the technical achievement of the episode. What impresses me is how that technical approach serves the purposes of story and character and theme. The Haunting of Hill House has spent five episode introducing each of these characters, letting us get a feel for their baggage and damage, sprinkling in vague but potent details about the events that led to this funeral and the one that happened twenty-six years ago.
But here, we get payoff, we get five episodes and two and half decades worth of complicated, interwoven family trauma spilling out at a time when everyone is raw and in pain. Whether you’re talking about long-simmering anger from children to parents about withheld truths and mental illnesses dressed up as magic, or sibling-on-sibling grievance over turning a tortured family story into a commercial product, or longstanding resentments across the whole family about who’s too prideful, who’s too naive, who’s too easily swayed, and who’s an embarrassment.
At times, it becomes a little much for this all to come out right here right now, but single fights have a way of escalating until they encompass every fight, disagreement, and beef two people have ever had. Mangify that times the size of a large family, and you have years of pain and grievance spilling out in the shadow of a dead sister and child that causes each member of the Crain family to look inward and blame outward.
What makes “Two Storms” a cut above is how the cinematography and lack of editing works with that. There is little music in this episode, and few cuts to hide stumbles or offer the best takes of a given moment. Instead, the whole thing rolls out like a stage play, with elegant blocking that takes up the entire space and gives you the sense of this family tumbling through all of this mourning and remorse and anger in real time, unvarnished and unpleasant but real. That helps counterbalance some of the show’s weaker inclinations toward overstatement and contrivance, letting a very constructed set of scenes feel fly-on-the-wall true given the swirling, following eye of the camera that doesn't give the characters, or the audience, a chance to breathe.
But as much as that’s used for emotional ballast in the scenes in the present, it works just as well when the show connects it to the storm in the past and uses it for horror. As much as the lack of cuts makes it hard for the viewer to look away when a family is hashing out all of their hardships, it also helps put the audience squarely in the middle of the horror and panic when a hailstorm hits and Nellie goes missing in the past. For one thing, the way the show connects the two through the uses of sets and its now-trademark match cuts does a splendid job interweaving the then and now.
But it also let’s the show use its technical mastery to make the audience experience the same terror and uncertainty within the storm at the Hill House. Nellie’s disappearance, the panicked screams from the children, Liv Crain appearing and disappearing in hallways, all adds to the eeriness and immediacy of the search for a young girl who seemed to disappear into thin air. In one time period, she is gone and there is a mission for the Crains to work together to find her, and in another, she is gone, and there is no hope of bringing her back as what’s left of the family bonds among them start to crack and crumble.
All the while, there is that technical mastery, whether through clever edits or digital inserts, people disappear down hallways, or adults become children and become adults once more in a single take, or ghouls haunt entryways and them vanish when you’re able to take a second look. The orchestration that must have taken, to interlace all this together, is beyond impressive, and conveys the sweaty, unraveling sense of a broken family breaking further in the present, and a loving family knocked onto its back foot in the past.
Overall, this is the high water mark for The Haunting of Hill House thus far -- an episode that feels like the culmination of everything we’ve seen, all the characters we’ve come to know, thus far, into one long choreographed dance of grief and worry and hurt that bleed from one time period into the next, and back again.
