Despite the fact that the beats and the story here are played pretty straight, and therefore become predictable, this formula really works. Some neat visual ideas as well (the sequence at the movie theatre was a particular standout for me).
I was shocked at the humanity they managed to find in what should be a pretty rote disaster movie. I should not have been shocked, because director Lee Isaac Chung’s Minari was one of the most affecting films I’ve seen in recent years. But at this point, my trust in Hollywood to tell human stories has been completely eroded. The studios have replaced the humanity in our summer blockbusters with quips and snark, and I am no longer amused by any of it. So Twisters was a genuine surprise. I wasn’t moved, but I found it shockingly tasteful.
In short, you can tell that Chung and his crew actually cared. In today’s world, that empathy for the story (and the audience) feels increasingly rare.
]]>I’m sort of stunned by how divided folks are on this. I’ve seen takes that range from Wicked being a modern masterpiece to it being an attack on democracy. Those are both pretty crazy takes. This is your typical high-polish, low-effort Hollywood event, and I don’t understand the passion of either side.
My wife and I saw Wicked the musical when it was in Toronto, something like a million years ago. We didn’t like it much then. It’s big on dazzle and low on brain cells. Completely soulless, but yet a mildly entertaining diversion.
That’s pretty much the movie too. But dazzle is Hollywood’s specialty, and low brain cell amusement is what the studios do best. (And it’s hard to blame Hollywood for this soulless CGI soup when this story has always been soulless and lacking in humanity, even when it pretends to have so much heart.) So it’s hard to be mad about this, and in my opinion, the dazzle works better on screen than it does on stage.
Perfectly slight Friday night entertainment.
]]>It doesn’t live up to the heights of the first two instalments (particularly the second), but I didn’t expect it to. It’s still a great time, even if it trades in the British setting (where Paddington truly belongs) for a misguided adventure film. Thankfully, many of the other series’ charms (its particular visual style and editing nuance in particular) is retained.
I chortled, guffawed, and haha’d many times throughout.
I dearly missed Sally Hawkins, who really brought the previous films together. Out of the new cast members, Olivia Colman in particular is an absolute delight.
]]>It’s shocking that any of the emotional beats land, because this is a bloated bore of a film in every other way. Coogler is a talented director, but he bit off way more than he could chew. The underwater sequences are unflattering next to James Cameron’s work in Way of Water, and the political back and forth and the resulting violence all feel forced and unwarranted. The escalation towards endless violence all feels like bickering between two lesser countries.
This was also another one of those poorly lit, visually ugly movies. I know cameras these days can do it, but it looks bad! If only our current directors studied light.
Halfway through, I wished I was watching a Star Wars prequel — even Attack of the Clones! — or The Way of Water instead.
]]>Honestly kinda fun, but it’s odd to me how this franchise is increasingly becoming Spy Kids for people who think they’re too cool and edgy for Spy Kids. Just a lot of nonsense tech and silly bad guys who introduce themselves as the bad guys.
Often hilarious, though.
I will admit I fell asleep for the final climax, but I was on a long flight and running on just a few hours sleep. Hard to say if it was the movie’s fault.
]]>I genuinely laughed until I cried. Perfectly cast. It’s not particularly quotable, but everybody’s delivery is pitch perfect. Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughan could not have been more perfect for these roles.
If I had seen this as a teenager when it came out, if would have struck me as lame. But as an adult who has survived many wedding seasons, and had my “wild oats” phase in university, I recognized almost every one of the character stereotypes in this as people I know. This movie felt kind of tailor made for my life stage at the moment.
]]>Awful. The exact sort of terrible, artless filmmaking that previously brought us movies like Valentine’s Day, but applied to the John Wick formula with zero consistency, vision, or novelty. Even the action scenes are rote, to a point where one character comments on it during the climax as a joke.
Hollywood as a factory, relentlessly creating “content.”
]]>Part of what makes this work is its sincerity. If Woody Allen made this even ten years earlier, he might have starred, which would have been a worse movie: every quip he makes in his films somehow sounds cynical (and sometimes cruel).
On the other hand, Owen Wilson’s wide-eyed, “oh shucks” performance is affable and earnest. He doesn’t act like Woody; through his eyes, we see Paris as charming and nostalgic, not unlike him. He puts heart into it, and completely sells the illusion.
Perpetual golden lighting only helps romanticize the illusion, and it makes Wilson’s performance appear even more sincere. In our current era of cynical filmmaking and superhero cash-ins, this goofy little romance remains a breath of fresh air.
]]>Had to find a copy of the theatrical cut in 4K and watch this again with some friends. An incredible, enthralling experience, absolutely unlike anything else out there. Stunned silence from our friends when it was over, who were just completely unable to process everything we all witnessed for a few minutes.
It reminded me a lot of classic mythology, in the sense that it’s telling an Odyssey-like story made up of small vignettes. When the climax arrives, it stands in stark contrast to what came before, and the established rules of the previous narratives no longer apply. The edge of the map has been found, and here be monsters. An incredibly smart structure for this sort of story.
I’ve never seen Redux or The Final Cut. I wouldn’t mind trying them out next time, although I worry they might slow down the pacing.
]]>I feel like I watched a totally different movie, compared to everybody else. Perhaps it’s because I’m a big fan of the original. Its atmospheric and has an incredible vibe, and it’s aged particularly well. Its sense of dread is still palpable, despite being over 100 years old.
On the surface, that seems like it would be right up Eggers’ alley. To his credit, he nailed the vibe: the dark, gothic presentation is excellent (although perhaps a little too inspired by Coppola’s Dracula for my liking). The visuals are generally good.
But the changes Eggers has made to the original film will, in my opinion, age poorly.
First, the film slows to a crawl in the last forty minutes as Nosferatu (spoilers) kills people (mostly offscreen), and the characters react. The debate about whether or not Nosferatu is a demon takes far too long; we the audience know he is a demonic force, and because it’s too late and people are dying left and right, debating it does not increase tension. It’s just exasperating tedium. It’s forty minutes of watching people make stupid decisions in a horror movie, but without any decisions, and instead just wiffle waffling. The original Nosferatu benefitted from its lack of dialogue and the relative lack of dialogue screens. I felt myself tuning out visually for thirty minutes and treating the boring later half of this film like a podcast.
Secondly, while I was really into the vibe of the first half of the time, the second half slowly (as you might have gathered) descends closer and closer to misery porn. I am tired of modern horror mostly being scenes of people yelling or crying at one another about their misery. It’s not frightening. It either triggers your own past trauma of grief or misery, or it offends you with its boredom. (It doesn’t help that half of the cast here thinks they’re in a self-important period piece, and the other half think they’re in a B monster movie, so even the misery porn is tonally all over the place.)
I strongly believe all these horror films with misery porn elements are going to be regarded poorly for it in twenty years.
Thirdly and finally, I (like many others) am not into the design of Nosferatu. I love good monster design, but part of the charm of Nosferatu in the original is that he has a certain beguiling appeal. A major part of the horror is that we can understand what might attract people to him. This rendition loses all of that appeal in the desire to make Nosferatu look like he’s truly undead — a noble goal, but not the correct path to take for this film.
Artfully done (if not too self indulgent), and visually as spectacular as a desaturated take on gothic Germany can be, but it’s sadly a swing and a miss for me.
]]>This was extremely not for me. I thought it had the opportunity to be an interesting character study, or at least sexy, but somehow it was neither of those things. The entire affair (pun intended) was mostly tedious.
]]>Fun! Some great visual ideas. The limited runtime of most animated films forces them to get straight to the point with their storytelling, and as is often the case, Kung Fu Panda benefits immensely from its immediacy.
]]>I liked this less than the original, I think. It’s hard to say, because I know I really disliked the original thanks to my Letterboxd review of it, but I have completely blotted that film from my memory. Zero recollection of ever having seen it.
Still, I am sure I like this one less.
]]>Now we’re talking. Everything comes together here. An all-timer. Fun, sexy, funny, action-packed. Great Sunday matinee.
]]>Still my favourite of these movies, although Rogue Nation isn’t far behind. Incredible action sequences and stunts throughout, and Henry Cavill is one of the best villains any of these Bond-inspired franchises have ever had.
]]>I wanted to watch something dumb, but also something that doesn’t literally insult my intelligence, and this is a perfect movie for that vibe. Seth Rogen also makes so many jokes every minute; if one of them doesn’t work for you, just wait five seconds and another one might. It’s quality via quantity, and it works perfectly for this genre of filmmaking.
Also, I think they cast almost everybody in this movie. A completely bananas list of cameo appearances.
]]>I think it’s one of the best Hollywood movies in the past decade.
]]>My esteem for this film grows as I get older. The more I learn about the brutality of Rome’s empire, the more apparent it is that Ben-Hur is an excellent demonstration of their might and the bitter heel they ground their constituents under. The action sequences are all spectacular, but it’s the small moments of humanity under the thumb of empire that really stand out to me.
I also think that Ben-Hur does an excellent job depicting the crucifixion of the Christ. It’s not that the details are all correct, or as we think they would have been historically. It’s that they capture the confusion of many Jewish people at the time — why this man? What crime has he committed? The realization I had is that the film was teasing a Roman show of force against the Jews for its three hour run time, and they (and the religious leaders) chose the crucifixion of Jesus as that eventual show of force. “This is what happens when you threaten our empire. We keep you alive to serve this ship. So row well and live.”
There is no room in an empire for negotiation. At no point can Ben-Hur barter peace for his people. He cannot befriend Rome without becoming a Roman. And if he does not choose to be a part of the empire, to embrace a new identity, he is branded a threat.
Ultimately, while I watched this because it’s Easter, I was reminded of the terrible might of dictators, and how there is no true freedom in their imperial worlds. Only oppression exists, even for those who live and die in its heart: “it goes on, Judah. The race is not over.”
]]>Extremely moving, particularly in the second half, where our protagonist’s life is put on trial in a sense. (It reminded me very much of Rashomon.) I absolutely loved watching a bunch of men get sloshed while discussing the life of one of their own, which felt so real and human next to other films I’ve watched recently.
My wife works in tourism for our city, and is very familiar with the pains of bureaucracy. For her, Ikiru might have hit too close to home.
]]>I was not prepared for this moving, transcendent cinema about what it means to be human. At one point, one man calls another “beloved,” and I started weeping, and then it just didn’t stop for another 15 minutes.
Also, Domingo is amazing in this.
]]>