tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12823454775427785842024-02-19T11:14:14.209+00:00Myerla's Movie Reviews.Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.comBlogger547125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-40435700456061394052021-03-02T09:32:00.004+00:002021-03-02T09:34:00.394+00:00Minari<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8a/Minari_(film).png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8a/Minari_(film).png" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There was a great deal of controversy when the Golden Globes, in
all its infinite wisdom, placed <i>Minari</i> in the Foreign Language category
(the same thing happened to Lulu Wang’s <i>The Farewell </i>just over a year
ago). Dubbed racist, this is a binary and robotic following of their
rigid rules from the Golden Globe committee who seem to struggle with
the idea that a film in a different language can still be American (it’s
becomes more controversial as they didn’t place the likes of Inglorious
Bastards into the same category). There’s nothing “foreign” about
<i>Minari </i>as its an American film about a very real American ideal. An
ideal which has, for centuries, tempted people from all over the world
to the prosperous lands of the United States of America, each of whom
contributed to the story of America’s relationship with its immigrants. </div><span><a name='more'></a></span><p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"><p><i>Minari
</i>is about the ragged American Dream and its idealistic intent that is in
equal part alluring but also full of empty promises and broken dreams.
The Yi family find themselves in surroundings totally alien to them (in
this case rural Arkansas) in a small, rickety trailer that could easily
be blown away from a tornado. There are many hardships to endure for the
Yi family who struggle for money, struggle in their personal
relationships and struggle with loneliness living in a small town where
personal connections and friendships are hard to come by. </p><p>Monica’s
(who yearns for a sense of community that can found in either a big
city or a return to Korea) loneliness and her husband’s blind following
of the American Dream, with Jacob devoting his entire time to the farm,
becomes the main cause of the chasm that grows between them. They begin
to forget what made them fall in love in the first, no longer feeling
the romantic feelings they once had for each other. The martial strife
is very well written (the two performances are incredible), with the
tension between the pair bubbling underneath the surface until it
silently explodes in an emotional climax (even if I felt one aspect of
the climax was a little contrived).</p><p>It’s this look at family and
marital life that makes <i>Minari </i>a tender tale. Much like the poignant and
deliberately paced films from the Japanese director Hirokazu Kore-eda,
director Lee Isaac Chung allows for light humour among the struggles as
the family overcome difficulties and bond across generations in the
midst of great hardship. It’s the dynamic and complex inter-personal
relationships that helps the film become bittersweet, triumphant and
optimistic, leaving us with a satisfied, affirming feeling of assurance
in the importance of family. </p><p>The film’s relaxed pacing allows us
to feel this assurance and faith in family helping us overcome
obstacles. The central relationship between young David (Alan Kim) and
his grandmother (Youn Yuh-jung) is allowed grow and flourish into
something poignant and moving, despite American-born David’s initial
rejection of anything Korean (according to David his grandmother smells
"Korean"). As the grandmother, Youn Yuh-jung brings some much life to
the role, helping build the relationship between her and David.</p><p>As
well written as the personal relationships are (even Jacob and David
share their touching moments), I felt Anne (the older sister) was left
out of the story, with the brother taking most of the film’s and
parent’s attention (perhaps due to his heart condition). I would have
liked to see more from Anne’s perspective, and how she felt feeling as
though her grandmother and parents focused more on her younger sibling.
She’s left to be the responsible one, looking after her brother more
than the parents did, and this must add to her isolation as she
struggles to connect to her own family and those outside it.</p><p>It’s
interesting to note that the Yi family face many problems, but racial
hostility isn’t one of them. Comments are made that are insensitive,
such as the “why the flat face” comment, but it seemingly comes more
from ignorance and lack of experience talking to someone of a particular
race. In the film, it’s rarely hostile, but it still introduces a
certain distance and divide between the Korean born family members and
the locals, whilst the American born David is able to overcome that
divide. The people of the small town treat the Yi family with curiosity
rather than hostility (with one young local boy befriending David). It
doesn’t mean that the comments weren’t racist, but they more stem from a
childish lack of understanding about the impact they might cause from
what they are saying (being that the most obvious, and perhaps only,
cases of racism in the film are from children who perhaps don’t know
better). </p><p>It’s beautifully shot and scored and driven by a story
that is very personal whilst simultaneously a tale of social isolation
and longing for home and security that many immigrants traveling to
America can relate to no matter where they are from.</p></div>Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-34845094463859099512020-11-11T14:28:00.006+00:002020-11-11T14:28:52.516+00:00Days<p> </p><div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:127805713/">
<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/Days_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="377" data-original-width="264" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/Days_poster.jpg" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>Tsai Ming-liang’s Days is the type of film the words “deliberately
paced” was invented for. This meditative, virtually wordless film
relishes in its slowness to the extent it’ll test the patience of many
film-goers. Director Tsai Ming-liang allows his shots to linger in a way
that’s a contrast to modern cinema. These shots, static and ponderous,
linger on day to day activities in a busy city as people go about their
lives. Among these people are Kang and Nom, one lives alone in a large
house and the other in a small apartment. We follow these two as they go
through the day, until they finally meet in a small motel bedroom.<span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>Days
is a film about social alienation and loneliness in an urbanised
setting. The film follows Kang through the busy city and whilst the film
often focuses on the characters entirely alone, it seems that when
they're among huge crowds they are at their most loneliest and
alienated. it’s interesting to note that throughout his day, Kang hardly
shares a word with another person. The same can be said of Non, who
also hardly shares a word with another person. It captures the many
stories we hear of the most extreme examples of loneliness in our
society where one can go an entire day without meaningful human
interaction.</p><p>The way the film wordlessly follows both central
characters as they go about their day, preparing vegetables and walking
through the busy streets, allows us to experience the daily lives of
these characters. We learn of Kang’s neck issues and his attempts to
remedy the aliment. They live lonely lives, with their only interaction
being with each other where a massage ends in a happy ending. It’s an
erotic scene where the genuine human connection is displayed, and it
makes for a powerful scene to see queer cinema shown like that.</p><p>The
problem really is the film, for me a least, shows what you what
loneliness and alienation looks like but never made me feel it.
Loneliness can come in many forms, and it’s never simply being alone.
It’s more to do with lacking something, like a close friendship or
romantic relationship, you desire. It general, it is lacking a personal
connection with another. Loneliness is other people; others can make you
feel lonely in how they treat or include/exclude you.</p><p>Days never
captured me on an emotional level, never really made empathise with
either Kang or Non. I simply didn’t care. There are many ways to capture
loneliness in cinema and alienating certain people by its extreme
minimalism filmmaking with an (almost) complete lack of dialog and no
translation for the minimal dialogue may not click with certain people
(such as myself). </p><p>Strangely though, the more I think about the
film the more I feel its melancholic loneliness began in have an effect
on me as I pondered the effect it truly had. I do wish I had watched
this in a cinema, where distractions were at a minimum to truly absorb
the film at the time rather than lying awake at night.</p><p>There’s a
lot of interesting ideas, and good to see a film be so patient and
leisurely paced, but it’s done in a way that’s just tests my patience
just a little too much.</p></div>Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-83625854942216317992020-11-11T14:27:00.002+00:002020-11-11T14:27:45.929+00:00Out of Africa<div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:126968586/" style="text-align: left;">
<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3c/Out_of_africa_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="350" data-original-width="224" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3c/Out_of_africa_poster.jpg" /></a></div> Oscar Winners or hopefuls can be a little pompous. The academy gets a
lot of stick and whilst they’ve made some shocking choices, the list of
best picture winners generally isn't awful. The 1980s did see quite a
few stuffy historical epics take the crown with Chariots of Fire,
Gandhi, Amadeus, Out of Africa, Platoon, The Last Emperor and Driving
Miss Daisy winning best picture (that makes 7 of the 10 winners).
Obviously, films in this list are better than others and some are less
stuffy than others, but Out of Africa wins the Oscar for being the most
stereotypical Oscar winning film.<span><a name='more'></a></span><p></p><p>One’s enjoyment of Out of Africa
depends fully on how easily you are able to accept this beautiful and
romanticised view of life on the African continent and the continent
itself. It’s unsurprising that David Watkin nabbed an Oscar for his
cinematography because Africa looks stunning - almost as good as an
Attenborough documentary. The roaming wildlife and the incredible
landscapes are all photographed immensely and it’s the exactly the type
of cinematography that award voters will notice (the type that the
Twitter account One Perfect Shot will fawn over).</p><p>The
cinematography is perfect for the feel of the film which aims to show
Africa as this exciting haven for rich, white and privileged Europeans
to escape their bustling lives in the smoggy cities of Europe. The film
is based on the experiences of Karen Blixen and therefore its likely to
be focused on her experiences and her personal memories of Africa, but
it doesn’t feel like a truly authentic representation of the continent
and its people and its limited to her foreign viewpoint and her personal
experiences only.</p><p>The film isn’t really concerned about the
natives’ side of the relationship with the British colonial empire as
they are pushed to the side. Karen does fight to have the natives
restored to their lands (which the British refuse) and begins to
understand and accept the rights of the natives to their land (for
instance, after the dam was breeched repeatedly, Karen let the water
flow back into Mombasa - indicating that the land will always return to
where and whom it belongs to). The story is undoubtably told from the
privileged European side, the African tribes are always subservient and
whilst the film does look at Karen’s relationship with the locals, the
closest relationships are generally the subservient ones.</p><p>As a
central couple, Karen and Deyns aren’t exactly fighting against the odds
in their love affair in the heart of Africa. Oscar nominated Street is
superb whilst Redford (not nominated) is pretty decent as well, but as a
central couple their chemistry isn’t the most appealing. There also
isn’t any dramatic tension or barriers that would ensure a love against
all odds story in a way that makes Romeo and Juliet so powerful (or even
films set against an infamous historical backdrop such as The Promise).
Any addition to the romantic story would be purely creative licence but
it may have added some dramatic tension to Deyns and Karen’s love
affair.</p><p>However, the film kind of works and I put it down mostly
to the cinematography and John Barry’s score which managed to cast a
powerful spell on me that I totally brought this romanticised view of
Africa. Once the film finished, its issues were laid bare, but whilst
watching I was appreciating the film’s elegance and beauty and I found
myself caring where it went.</p></div>Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-14046213933660120022020-09-30T10:49:00.004+01:002020-09-30T10:49:57.870+01:00Tenet<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/Tenet_movie_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="385" data-original-width="260" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/Tenet_movie_poster.jpg" /></a></div><p></p><p></p><div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:121825733/">
<p style="text-align: left;">Christopher Nolan’s Tenet is the only really big movie to soldier
through the pandemic and be released in cinemas during the most
lucrative time of the year. Others like Black Widow, No Time to Die and
Mulan all were either pulled back to later in the year or released on a
streaming service. Rightly or wrongly, Tenet went ahead with its release
with many cinema chains banking on Nolan being so in demand people
(some) will go out to their trip first cinema in half a year.<span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;">It’s
certainly a film made for the cinema with a huge screen and deafeningly
loud speaker system. Nolan’s epic sense of scale benefits from the
larger screen and using a smaller screen will diminish these effects and
make some of its problems even more pronounced. Even though I think the
score is obnoxious, headache inducingly terrible its impact is made
ever the stronger from being inside a cinema. In general, I do think
some of the sound mixing doesn’t quite work. I can appreciate the effect
it is trying to induce but it’s almost impossible to catch snippets of
dialogue amongst the loud score.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Tenet seems a better film to look
at rather than listen to. The script is written in a way that every
line of dialogue works towards advancing the plot or the idea of
reversed/inverted time. Everything is exposition almost as though robots
are talking to each other rather than human beings. It’s a script
loaded with needless exposition where characters explain things like
Freeports or the fact that Russian arms dealer Andre Sator (a hammy and
menacing Kenneth Branagh) is a Russian arms dealer dealing weapons.
These are all things that the characters should already know, but the
film feels it needs ham-fistedly explain these things to the audience.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Essentially
it leaves the characters no room to flourish, they feel as though they
are mere cogs in a machine geared for a greater purpose. Tenet is
certainly epic cinema but its emotionally lacking, devoid of personality
or character. Thereby it makes for an epic experience, with the
staggering action set pieces, the sense assaulting soundtrack and time
bending, wibbly wobbly timey wimey narrative stuff but one that’s
lacking emotional substance (unlike Interstellar where Nolan was also
giving total free reign).</p><p style="text-align: justify;">That said Elizabeth Debicki does try to
bring some emotional weight to her role. She is the only character we
know anything about as she suffers in an abusive relationship and the
Protagonist (John David Washington) sees it as his duty to protect her
from her psychological and abusive husband. All Debicki’s work is undone
by a script that makes her role defined entirely by the men of the
film. Another issue is Ludwig Göransson’s score which blares obnoxiously
during a scene where she is being beaten by her abusive husband (in a
grossly tasteless use of music during a brutal scene) .</p><p style="text-align: justify;">It’s a
great film to watch and you want to see where it goes (even if the film
isn’t as smart as it thinks it is) but I do think that is actually the
least rewarding and least substantial of Nolan’s films.</p></div>Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-5272259129123977552020-07-04T12:01:00.002+01:002020-07-04T12:02:01.753+01:00Selah and the Spades<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:100707182/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/39/Selah_and_the_Spades_poster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/39/Selah_and_the_Spades_poster.jpeg" width="216" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At Haldwell Boarding School there are five factions. Each faction
plays a role within the school, for example the Prefect faction makes
sure the teachers aren’t aware of the students’ partying. The main
faction are the Spades, led by Selah (a superb Lovie Simone), and their
main role is to supply everyone with the fun stuff (drugs and alcohol).
Selah is in her final year and is looking for a successor to lead the
Spades. The search is a tough one, but when Paloma (Celeste O'Connor)
joins the school, Selah strikes up a friendship thinking she has found
her successor. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Director Tayarisha Poe described Selah and the
Spades as Clueless meets The Godfather. It’s an inviting prospect to
combine an Oscar winning epic with an endearing cult favourite. Two
films from two genres that couldn’t be more different from each other.
Strangely, however, it seems to work with the five factions (acting like
the five families) attempting to install peace and keep to their own
patch but with one faction head unwilling to let her power wavier and
even looking to build it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film is mainly focused on Selah
(Lovie Simone) as she approaches a crossroad in her life where she is
under big pressure to make important decisions on her future. Her
overbearing mother wants Selah to attend Redwood, a prestigious school,
but Selah is concerned that her position and standing at Haldwell
Boarding School is unlikely to follow her. Under great pressure to
succeed (Selah’s mother is unimpressed about the 93/100 test result),
Poe’s use of closeups allows us to understand Selah’s emotional
experiences and help the film become an intimate portrayal of black
youth.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Interestingly, it’s revealed in a powerful conversation
with Paloma that Selah is asexual. It’s a shame that Poe doesn’t go into
great detail about this but it’s a rarity in film and especially a
rarity in films about the high-school experience. However, from the way
the story is told, its combination of two different films, and the way
the film it is shot, Selah and the Spades is a film with a unique
vision. Tayarisha Poe wanted to stay away from the often-trodden ground
of high school, teenage romance and instead focuses on friendships and
the power struggle within those friendships.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Selah is an
interestingly flawed character and one of her flawed moments is where
her jealously tests a friendship when her close friend falls for one of
the cheerleaders. This friend, Maxxie, begins to spend less time with
Selah and he also starts getting sloppy in his work for the Spades. This
begins to put a strain on their friendship as Maxxie has demands from a
relationship that Selah is unable or unwilling to understand making her
feel lonely and distant. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Selah and the Spades is a confident and
assured debut from Tayarisha Poe whose use of close ups help create an
intimate story and ramp up the hallucinogenic affects from the use of
colour. The other characters feel a little underdeveloped, but this was
always Selah story and she makes for a flawed if empathic character.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-20326563766653843502020-07-04T12:00:00.000+01:002020-07-04T12:00:01.457+01:00Artemis Fowl <div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:109852739/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Artemis_Fowl_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Artemis_Fowl_poster.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the many affects of the COVID-19 pandemic was an increase in
the number of movies, that would have had a cinema release, which went
straight to VOD or had a shorter run in the cinemas. Artemis Fowl is one
those movies that skipped the cinema and went straight to Disney’s
streaming service. It was probably for the best as it has all the
makings of a box office disaster for more reasons than simply being
really bad. Simply being good wouldn't have saved the film as it’s part
of the genre (young adult fiction) that has decreased in popularity
since the Hunger Games and Twilights days, and it’s start of a franchise
rather than being one that’s already established in the movie industry
(plus this has been in development hell since the early 2000s).</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Robert
Shaw’s grandson, Ferdia Shaw, plays bratty, criminal mastermind (though
I didn’t actually see him break any laws apart from assaulting fairies
but I doubt human’s have a law for that) Aretmis Fowl who finds out the
fairytales his father (Colin Farrell) told him about are true, and
faries do live under the surface. Fowl needs to find the Macguffin, a
weapon named The Aculos, to rescue his father (Colin Farrell) from the
villainous pixie Opal Koboi who wants to use this Macguffin for herself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I
do think there isn’t any doubt that this film would tank in cinemas.
The word of mouth will be middling and the desire to go out and cinema
would be very low. With it being on Disney + it’s hardly strenuous to
flick on the TV (or turn on the PC), navigate to Disney + and sit
through the film’s brief 90-minute runtime. The film’s short running
time becomes its downfall as it leaves so many things unexplained or
underdeveloped – what was the human - fairy relationship of the past?
What happened to the fairies sucked up but the time freeze thing? Are
they lost to all time or transported back to base?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Much of the
film’s issues lie in how lame and incredibly datedly corny it is. The
central two performances aren’t great, but they’re left with
cringe-worthy dialogue and a lack of development in their characters. We
also have a neighing centaur, a troll that’s a “big meanie” (the
character who traumatised the troll with this vicious insult is supposed
to be 12 not 6) and Judi Dench arriving on Irish shore saying “top of
the mornin’”. It all leads to an experience where you can’t work out if
your snorts are of derision or genuine laugher. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This campy, corny
ridiculousness stands as much chance being incredibly enjoyable (see
Robin Hood; Prince of Thieves) as it does being completely disastrous.
But unlike Prince of Thieves, Fowl lacks a good, fun villain. Opal Koboi
(who apparently isn’t introduced to the series until the second book)
is build up (briefly) as the most powerful pixie ever yet she literally
doesn’t do anything (she even has a Darth Vader “noooooooooooo” moment).
It doesn’t help that the lead performances, and many other
performances, are pretty wooden but they not helped by mostly
expositional dialogue. The only half decent performance is Josh Gad who,
whilst being an exposition machine, gets a few laughs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, with
the villain being a non-entity and dragged into a film they shouldn’t be
in we are left with a film without a climax. It just gets resolved with
ease. Add that to a world where magic can pretty much do anything from
healing the dead and teleporting people to safety we are left with a
story without a third act. Kenneth Brannah has directed good films in
the past, but unless his original vision been cut up beyond all
recognition in the editing room, this an effort falling well under what
he is capable of.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-83508862044537638662020-07-04T11:58:00.000+01:002020-07-04T11:58:00.214+01:00The Invisible Man<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:93221000/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/The_Invisible_Man_(2020_film)_-_release_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/The_Invisible_Man_(2020_film)_-_release_poster.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After the lukewarm reception, both critically and financially, to The
Mummy, Universal’s idea for a Dark Universe based on their horror
characters of the past was put on hold before it had even begun. This
included The Invisible Man in which Johnny Depp was tipped to star.
However, this version of the story was left on the wayside and was
picked up by Blumhouse Productions who hired Leigh Whannell to direct
and rewrite the story.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Leigh Whannell’s story bares very little
similarity to the 1933 film and instead is a modernised take on the
subject, incorporating modern and timely themes. The film follows
Ceillia Kass (Elizabeth Moss) as she quietly sneaks around a plush and
elegant home, daring not to make a sound so that her abuser boyfriend
doesn’t wake up. She manages to escape and after two weeks of hiding
hears about his death. However, she begins to feel haunted by an
invisible entity and, as her boyfriend is a leading optics scientist,
she believes that he never died and found a way to become invisible. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
decision to centre the story on Ceillia rather than the titular villain
allows the timely themes to flourish. Pursued relentlessly by an
invisiable entity, The Invisible Man is clearly a tale about domestic
abuse and the trauma it leaves in its wake. It’s evident from the very
start of the film that Ceillia dares not wake her boyfriend as she
carefully gets out of bed. At this point, we don’t even know she’s
trying to escape (she simply could be getting a drink of water) but we
know that her boyfriend waking up would be the worst thing to happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Eventually
though it does transpire that she is trying to escape. In a 10-minute
dialogue free sequence the whole scenario and background is plain to see
as the tension is turned up to the max with the use of sound and smart
camera techniques. Moss creeps around the apartment, carefully executing
her plan of escape without making a sound. It is a stunning opening act
and perhaps one the most anxiety inducing opening acts in recent
memory. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Even in his death the spectre of abuse hangs over
Ceillia, so much so she is terrified to leave the house and spooked by
daily noises such as a jogger running past her home (clear evidence of
PTSD). The abuse is not only physical but also psychological as the
invisible man begins to make her doubt her own sanity by gaslighting her
and making her doubt her own mental state. Many of these moments were
inspired by real life stories so that these events feel real and
disturbing. The film makes an attempt to add ambiguity to whether there
is an invisible man causing this torment, but there is no doubt there is
an unseen abuser tormenting Ceillia and driving her friends away.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There
are certain leaps in logic to try and fit the narrative and the
invisible boyfriend seems more superhuman than just invisible, but you’d
have to go in believing in the possibility of this because it allows
the themes and narrative to flourish. The final act falls more in
thriller territory whilst the subtle first act builds the tension, but
Moss’s terrific central performance and Whannell’s fine work behind the
camera makes this a rewarding horror that delivers scares and is flushed
with thematic riches.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-8713392665074907692020-07-04T11:55:00.001+01:002020-07-04T11:55:22.094+01:00Never Rarely Sometimes Always<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:104996074/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Never_Rarely_Sometimes_Always.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="384" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Never_Rarely_Sometimes_Always.png" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When I lived in Ealing, I used to live near an abortion clinic which
found itself in the news frequently. It was often a site for
anti-abortion protestors to sit outside and harass women going in
making, I imagine, an incredibly difficult decision in difficult
circumstances. The circumstances of each woman are going to be different
woman to woman and whilst there is now a buffer zone in place the
presence of those protestors mirrors a later scene in Eliza Hittman’s
Never Rarely Sometimes Always.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The title is taken from a question
and answer session Autumn endures whilst at a New York clinic. It is
this scene where the film is at its most powerful, and Eliza Hittman’s
decision to focus on Autumn’s face, etched with emotion and pain from
the tough questions and painful past memories, makes the scene so
emotional. The use of close ups helps us really get into the core of
Autumn’s emotion turmoil and the performance by newcomer Sidney Flanigan
is incredibly raw and sensitive that throughout you’d wish you could go
in and offer words of comfort and support.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Never Rarely Sometimes
Always is a film about class (a light is shone on the costs of
healthcare to lower income citizens), women’s rights, and their rights
over their own bodies. It’s a film about safe access to abortions for
all, a respect for the woman’s privacy and the respect for the woman’s
final decision. Never should a woman have to travel to a major city to
have an abortion when she should be supported in her own town.
Travelling all the way to New York is such a daunting prospect that the
city is shot as this big, bustling, busy and sometimes even unnerving
place, which I imagine it must be for a small-town girl making a massive
decision.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In addition to being a story about women’s rights, it’s
a story about female friendship. Skylar (Talia Ryder), Autumn’s cousin,
helps her through the entire process and goes through similar
experiences of a dangerous city and lecherous men. It helps that both
Ryder and Flanigan give incredibly natural performances to convincingly
play their grounded and real characters . Never Rarely Sometimes Always
is an understated film that’s low in melodrama, subtle and with a fiery
anger and understanding Eliza Hittman tells the story of three women's
expirences, making it into one whole narrative. It’s hard not to watch
this film without feeling moments of anger and disbelief but the tale of
female friendship is a heart-warming one also.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-3342124961554710282020-07-04T11:53:00.004+01:002020-07-04T11:53:51.006+01:00Da Five Bloods<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:109893838/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Da_5_Bloods_poster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Da_5_Bloods_poster.jpeg" width="216" /></a></div>
The Vietnam war was the first televised war for Americans. Granted,
Americans could see the horrors of the Second War World in newsreels,
but for the first time horrific images of the victims of war was beamed
directly into the home of every American with a television set. It’s one
of the many reasons why the anti-war crowd was so strong and numerous
and their clashes with the heavy-handed police so vicious.<a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another
interesting aspect of the Vietnam War was the African American
involvement. America feared a domino effect, should South Vietnam fall
to the communist North, with all the other Asian countries following.
Effectively African Americans were fighting for the rights of others
when they hardly had any themselves. Despite disproportionately
enlisting and dying in Vietnam they still faced racial injustice in
Vietnam and at home.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film opens with Muhammed Ali proclaiming
“no viet cong ever called me a N*****” and it’s merely the start of a
politically charged film where frequent use of archival footage has a
powerful impact. Lee’s film is about black relations among each other in
modern day America, their discontent at their status at home (both in
the 60s and the present day). With the Black Lives Matter movement
protesting in major cities across the world, mirroring protests in the
film’s archival footage, Lee’s film becomes even more timely than it
would have originally been (even his 30-year-old film Do The Right Thing
is chillingly timely).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These central five characters are former
Vietnam vets. When serving in Vietnam, five African Americans (Paul,
David, Otis, Eddie and Norman) find a chest full of gold, which they
hide looking to dig it up when it’s safe to do. Many years later, four
of them return to Vietnam after hearing of a landslide which may have
revealed the location of the hidden gold. After years apart they finally
reunite and go on a deadly adventure through the dense and hot forests
of Vietnam, retracing and reliving the experiences they had 50 years
ago.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The story is told in these two different time periods. Lee
uses a different aspect ratio to homage the way news reports of the war
were broadcast and whilst certain aspects of the war scenes pale in
comparison to films like Platoon, they are powerfully violent scenes (if
you can get past the iffy makeup which doesn’t convincingly make the
actors look 50 years younger) but ones that lack the grandiose of
Apocalypse Now and the sweaty claustrophobia of Platoon.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This
isn’t really a bad thing because the isn’t really about that as the film
is about the legacy of the Vietnam War as much as it is about black
experiences during the war. American films about Vietnam have often
marginalised the experiences of both African Americans and, especially,
the Vietnamese. From the era of the Vietnam War and the decade preceding
it, Platoon stands out amongst propaganda films like The Green Berets
and dangerously inaccurate films like The Deer Hunter with its slightly
more critical stance of American actions against the Vietnamese people,
but it still viewed the war from a white point of view.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is
why in an interview with Sight and Sound, Lee stressed the importance of
looking at the war from both an African American and the Vietnamese
perspective. The legacy of the Vietnam War (or the American War as
Vietnamese call it) is still strongly felt with the landmines littering
the countryside (these landmines become a major plot point) and the
sensitivities and painful memories around the racist insult “gook”. The
misrepresentation of the war by films like the Rambo sequels are also
mentioned and shows Lee is at least aware of American cinema’s often
racist depiction of the enemy, particularly those of Asian descent.
However, even with these positives, it’s not as ground-breaking as it
thinks it is. The war scenes still depict the Vietnamese soldiers with a
typical of the genre facelessness and even in the present day they
don’t make memorable characters (with them either being a tour guide,
thug or former sex worker). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film is at its best when set in
the present day with the relationships and chemistry shared between the
four friends feeling authentic. The performances are all great with
Delroy Lindo’s monologue to the camera being one the film’s most
powerful moments. If there is an issue with the film’s modern set
scenes, there are moments that feel tonally all over place. Especially
when, someone fleeing a gun fight, steps on a mine and explodes. In the
way it was filmed, it almost feels comedic – like the fleeing coward
getting his comeuppance. It feels like something that Quentin Tarantino
would have shot and it somewhat jarred awkwardly. In fact the whole
transition into the final scenes while probably not pointless, feels
jarring and not strictly necessary. It’s a good film, but one that
doesn’t quite end as well as Lee’s greatest works.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-73963317733490826362020-05-13T23:49:00.001+01:002020-05-14T00:12:12.568+01:00Portrait of a Lady on Fire<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:92906803/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Portrait_of_a_Lady_on_Fire.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="333" data-original-width="250" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Portrait_of_a_Lady_on_Fire.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Since the release of a Portrait of a Lady on Fire a lot of discussion
has been generated about the differences between the male and female
gaze. Portrait of a Lady on Fire is directed by Celine Sciamma who is
female and also a lesbian. What this does is give the film an entirely
different feel and gaze to the likes of Blue is the Warmest Colour and
The Handmaiden, both of which were directed by men. Even having not seen
Blue is the Warmest Colour I know it’s quite famous (or infamous) for a
very long sex scene whilst The Handmaiden was more graphic than your
usual period drama.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Whilst The Handmaiden wasn’t lacking in
intimacy, it certainly does not have the same intimacy of Celine
Sciamma’s Portrait of a Lady on Fire. Celine Sciamma is able to draw up
on her own experiences and place the emphasis away from so called ‘male
voyeurism’ and focus more on sly glances and consensual looks where the
passion and love radiates from the screen. Compared to these two films
Portrait of a Lady on Fire isn’t a sexually graphic film (the French
supposedly think it isn’t ‘erotic’ enough) in the way Blue is the
Warmest Colour and The Handmaiden was but the way the film captures the
longing glances and the intimacy between the two central characters
radiates an erotic, sexually charged energy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film is told in
two different time periods, the prologue sees Marianne (Noemie Merlant)
teaching art to a modest sized class. She notices that a painting has
been brought out by a student and upon drawing attention to it gets
quizzed about the painting. This painting stirs up memories of the past
and Marianne begins the tale where, a decade or so back, she was
commissioned to paint a portrait of a woman named Heloise (Adele Haenel)
who was due to be wed to a man she hasn’t met. This had to be done in
secret as the portrait, upon its completion, will be inspected by her
potential husband and Heloise refuses to be married under such
circumstances. However, as the pair get closer and spend more time
together, they begin to realise their mutual attraction.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The fact
that it is directed by a woman (and a lesbian) opens the film up to an
entirely different vision (this female vision also makes the abortion
scene so powerful). It helps that the film is clearly in love with lead
actress Adele Haenel and those incredibly expressive blue eyes as the
camera examines every part of her like an artist examining their subject
(the first shot of Heloise is the back of her head). What also helps is
the enchanting and intoxicating chemistry between the leading stars,
Adele Haenel and Noemie Merlant. The pair exchange those, at first,
subtle glances that captures the essence of a forbidden romance. Haenel
is superb and the camera loves her, whilst Merlant captures Marianne’s
dilemma of knowing that completing the picture means never getting to
see Heloise again. The pair both wrestle with the prospect that his
romance is only fleeting.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Portrait of a Lady on Fire is about many
things, the female gaze, objectification of women and female
relationships but, for me its also about how art can play a strong role
in bringing about vivid memories of your past, whether it’s a positive
or negative memory. Be it a film, TV show, book, piece of music or
painting there’s always that piece of art that whenever you see it, hear
it, view it or read it, it brings an emotional reaction as you
associate that piece of art with that moment in your life. The film’s
final shot is a clear example of the power of the link between memory
and art.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Gorgeously photographed (the period setting and use of
lighting feels like something from Barry Lyndon) with the island (like
something from Jane Campion's The Piano but more secluded) setting
doubling as a place of solitude if entirely alone, but, if with someone a
paradise where the waves crash on an empty shore. Impeccably directed,
Portrait of a Lady on Fire is deserving of every one of its rave
reviews.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-82272590376433654072020-05-13T23:45:00.001+01:002020-05-13T23:45:58.593+01:00Underwater<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:90340894/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Underwater_poster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="398" data-original-width="250" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Underwater_poster.jpeg" width="201" /></a></div>
A few people have been a little sarcastic about this much delayed
underwater creature feature by calling it The Abyssmal. A little harsh
on a decent, if perfunctory, film but you can’t really deny the obvious
parallels between this and the likes of Alien and The Abyss. Set seven
miles below the ocean surface, a ragtag team of survivors fight for
their lives following a deadly explosion at an underwater station. It’s
believed that an earthquake caused the explosion, but it appears human
activity 20000 fathoms under the sea has awakened something unknown to
humanity.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
The film’s rather unimaginative title, which spells
exactly where the film is set, mirrors the general lack of surprise or
originality. Many of the good aspects of the film, such as the setting
and the creature design, are inspired by other (better) movies (with the
monster design being inspired by H.P Lovecraft). Admittedly, it does
this with an old-fashioned charm that’s appealing and enjoyable, but the
thinly written characters means the film’s conclusion falls flat.<br />
<br />
As
shown in 2019’s 47 Meters Down: Uncaged, underwater filming presents a
unique set of challenges. The most notable of these challenges being
shooting underwater obviously brings in issues where the lack of light
is the most prominent. Light doesn’t reach the sea floor and this
environment makes it hard to tell what’s really happening. Whilst the
film perhaps tries to mirror the claustrophobia and confusion of the
characters, it does make the film feel rather incoherent (particularly
when the film cuts away before the deaths get too gory) in the film’s
more dramatic moments on the sea floor.<br />
<br />
Kirsten Stewart tries her
best in the lead role, but it still feels like an effort to pay the
bills especially considering her choices of late have been slightly
pickier as she feel’s she’s done with basic, by the numbers thrillers
(that said this was shot three years ago). The rest of the cast are
fine, but a drawback is TJ Miller whose given dialogue so obnoxious one
can’t wait for the moment he eventually meets his demise.</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-58871266984766548642020-05-13T23:11:00.001+01:002020-05-13T23:11:55.149+01:00Bombshell<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:87632897/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Bombshell_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="318" data-original-width="220" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Bombshell_poster.jpg" /></a></div>
“Liberal Hollywood is racist” “They are the elite” “They are very bad
for our country” proclaims Donald Trump in a series of tweets. Its fair
to say that Donald Trump and his supporters dont take to kindly to
lefty, snowflakey Hollywood. So it was somewhat of a surprise that a
film pops up depicting the main anchors of Trump’s leading supporting
newswork as the heroines. Based on the 2016 sexual harassment scandal
that plagued Fox news, Bombshell stars as Charlize Theron as Megyn Kelly
who becomes part of a scandal that ousts Roger Ailes.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Their are
certain crimes that are horrible whoever it happens to but that
shouldn’t really stop any film or anyone analysing their characters
including their own contributions to other forms of discrimination
(racism, homophobia). Working for Fox News you’ll must have opinions
that don’t exactly scream inclusivity or diversity (the idea of a black
Santa spells the end of the world) but the film tones down these
opinions to make them more likeable. Strange considering the fact that
Nicole Kidman’s last line is “I don’t care if you don’t like me” but
we're not given a reason to not like her.<br />
<br />
However, I feel it’s a
film whose heart is in the right place and is, to a fault, apolitical.
It doesn't discuss that these women worked for a news agency that looked
to discredit and discriminate people based on race, sex, sexual
preferences, gender identity, etc. It can’t quite take on the fact these
women have suffered greatly but also work for an organisation that
perpetrates discrimination. However, it feels that politics isn’t
important and whatever their politics what these women suffered was
heinous. And it’s right, as the toxic atmosphere, the back stabbing, the
whispers and the sexual assaults and unwanted advances are immoral. The
film may make a heroine out of the three leading ladies, but Fox News
is shown to be a truly awful place to work.<br />
<br />
Led by a powerhouse
performance by an almost unrecognisable Charlize Theron (it took me a
few seconds to realise it was her) the film is powerfully acted by an
A-list cast featuring Kidman, Margot Robbie (remarkable in a scene where
Ailes forces her to lift her dress) and John Lithgow (plus some very
accomplished actors in smaller roles). However, the real star of the
show is Kazu Hiro whose superb make up work really captures the exact
people (namely women) Fox News looks for – Blonde and white. I honestly
didn’t see a single black, Asian or any other minority in the Fox News
office.</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-7922038530038786892020-05-13T23:04:00.002+01:002020-05-13T23:04:37.793+01:001917<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:86014507/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/1917poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="432" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/1917poster.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There was a lot of media hubbub about how 1917 was shot in one
continuous take. In fact that seemed to be the main selling point of the
movie even though its not entirely uncommon. When thinking about films
made like this most people’s minds go as far back as Alfred Hitchcock’s
Rope which, rather than being a single take, was several long takes that
have been subtly edited to appear as though its a single take (this is
how 1917 was filmed rather than being one take). Even previous films
about war have seen long takes make a great impact such as the Dunkirk
scene in Atonement and the trench sequences in Stanley Kubrick’s
anti-war film Paths of Glory.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The way the film was shot was the
main selling point in the film’s marketing and they did somewhat pull a
sneaky one on us by claiming the film was done in one continuous take. I
actually had read beforehand that this wasn’t the case as it was a
series of long takes stitched together to give the impression that the
film is a real time thriller that was a single continuous take.
Therefore I spent sometime trying to find out where they made these cuts
rather than focusing on the story because, as brilliant as the
filmmaking craft is, the overarching narrative was lacking and its more
of a film made from a series of brilliant set pieces. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That said I
don’t really want to take anything away from cinematographer Roger
Deakins and director Sam Mendes who have crafted a film that is
breathtaking. The long takes help drive up the tension and bring to
light how deadly and brutal the First World War was. Walking through the
muddy fields of No Man’s Land was a horrific ordeal with the landscape
littered by horse carcasses, bomb craters and dead bodies. Like the
Hungarian holocaust drama Son of Saul, the camera follows the central
character(s) - not lingering on the horror but more focusing on them as
they walk through a hellish landscape where death and suffering is on
all sides.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are certain scenes that are so staggering in
their brilliance that its hard not to be in awe of the technical
accomplishment. The plane crash and the final charge across No Man’s
Land are an incredible feat of meticulous planning and directorial
prowess. However, apart from the way the film was done (which has been
done before on a slightly smaller scale), the film doesn’t really bring
anything new to the table (yet it avoids some cliches like lions led by
donkeys - meaning incompetent generals leading brave troops to their
deaths). It lacks the emotional intensity of Peter Jackson’s They Shall
Not Grow Old and the strong anti-war themes of Paths of Glory and All
Quiet on the Western Front. The film certainly isn’t a nationalistic one
as it shows the grim realities of war but the Germans are so facelessly
depicted that their immoral actions are lazily predictable and feel as
they are only there to keep the plot moving.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I won’t deny I wasn’t
moved by the film, but I felt its my knowledge and what I brought to
the film which made the film's story work. Anyone in my generation or
before will know and loved someone who served in either the First or
Second World War and will no doubt know of the costly loss of life and
devastation both wars caused to many countries in Europe. The
film-making, real time narrative doesn’t really give time to build
character despite the excellent performance from George McKay who does
depict the incredible levels of courage displayed by so many young men
who fought and died for their country.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-57194286804756257832020-04-21T19:43:00.002+01:002020-04-24T10:39:51.316+01:00Parasite<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:89899233/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/53/Parasite_(2019_film).png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="378" data-original-width="265" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/53/Parasite_(2019_film).png" width="224" /></a></div>
Ever since <i>Parasite </i>was awarded the Palme D’or back in May 2019, it
had become the film to see. Rave reviews, excited buzz and Oscar
nominations led to <i>Parasite </i>become the first ever film not in the
English language to win the Best Picture. Even before this historical
moment, the screening I went to was packed, save for the first few rows,
and the audience gasped at the right moments, laughed at the right
moments and seemed to be genuinely into the film with one remarking
“that was intense”. I, obviously, don’t know how often the patrons
attend screenings of foreign movies, but Parasite’s incredible victory
may inspire them and others to see other foreign films if the likes of
Vue and Odeon show them outside London.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
It’s probably best to go
into <i>Parasite </i>knowing as little as possible but it’s relatively harmless
to know it’s about a poor family infiltrating a rich family. Like some
of Bong Joon Ho’s previous work (like <i>Snowpeicer </i>and <i>Okja</i>) <i>Parasite </i>is a
film about social structure, class and poverty. The train carriages in
<i>Snowpeicer </i>(Joon Ho’s first English language film) represent social
classes and divisions within society with the residents at the back of
the train having to fight their way to the front. Whilst <i>Ojka</i> and
<i>Snowpeicer </i>has exaggerated depiction of the wealthest class, <i>Parasite </i>is
far more ambiguous and layered in its depiction.<br />
<br />
It’s ambiguity
stems from asking the question “who is the parasite?” Is it the poor
family who have infiltrated their way into the nice, decadent home of
the rich family or is it the rich family that live off the backs of the
hardworking lower classes who do everything in the house? It’s a open
question, but Joon Ho does lean to one side and he does a remarkable job
at making the viewer empathise with the Kim family even though their
selfish actions cost the livelihoods of innocent people caught in the
crossfire.<br />
<br />
Whatever you make of their actions it’s undoubtedly a
scathing satire of the Korean class system and the barely concealed
contempt among these classes. The wealthy Park family often remark on
the distinctive working class smell and perhaps their ‘crossing the
line’ comments refer to any working class person breaking the glass
ceiling. The cinematography completely captures the stark contrast
between decadence and beauty of wealth and ugliness and grimness of
poverty.<br />
<br />
Brilliantly acted (particularly by Kim So Dam and
everyman actor Song Kang-ho), sharpish funny and tightly plotted,
<i>Parasite </i>is superb, thematically rich, throught-provoking film</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-14345436409461884532020-04-21T19:39:00.000+01:002020-04-21T19:39:08.282+01:00JoJo Rabbit<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:84710825/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Jojo_Rabbit_(2019)_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Jojo_Rabbit_(2019)_poster.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ever since the 1940s Hitler has been a source of comedy, notable
early films include Charlie Chaplin’s <i>The Great Dictator</i> and the more
broad comedy <i>Let George do It </i>(<i>To Hell with Hitler</i>) where George Forby
punches Hitler in the face (something similar happens in <i>JoJo Rabbit</i>).
Therefore, it’s slightly disappointing that Taika Waititi's film is more
like Forby’s broad comedy rather than the biting satire of Chaplin’s <i>
The Great Dictator</i>. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sold as some satirical anti-hate film, <i>JoJo
Rabbit </i>is disappointingly starved of a satirical edge. It makes jokes
about insane Nazi views on Jews mating with marine life and hiding horns
under their head of hair, but it tends to go more for slapstick where
characters accidentally destroy buildings with a rocket launcher or blow
themselves up with a grenade. I’m not denying the film is funny on
occasions, but mocking the goose-stepping, blonde, blue eyed loving
fanatics (who somehow missed the fact the fact that Hitler and Goebbels
are the polar opposite of Ayran) is incredibly easy and the film doesn’t
quite cut to the heart of the topic.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are aspects of the
film that are done better. The way the film doesn’t shy away from the
fact that nazi propaganda created a heroic figure out of Hitler that
appealed to young boys is accurate of the party's aims, but doesn’t go
into detail of what impressed the kids as its much more complicated than
simply being part of a club. At first, Jo Jo (Roman Griffith Davies)
admired the dictator, and saw him very much as a hero who he was devoted
to, however this changes as film goes on as JoJo finds a young, jewish
girl (played by Thomasin McKenzie) in the walls of his house and he
begins to question his blind nationalism and devotion to his hero.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
central relationship between the two is intensely moving and charming
with the two young stars forming a great chemistry where they build a
strong brother-sister bond. It’s where JoJo’s beliefs on Jewish people,
spread from nazi propaganda, are challenged and he begins to see that
the ideas that were being spread were lies and he begins to reject it.
It’s hardly subtle but its here the film becomes more of a look at Nazi
Germany society and how the evil ideas of nazism infected the minds of
the youth.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
However, you could argue that even here the film is a
little soft on German society during the war. It seems to show that only
the men (and women) in the grey suits were the vile racists whilst, in
reality, a lot of German society was responsible for their silence and
inaction (and direct action) in bringing Hitler to power. It’s a film
that certainly has its powerful and dark moments, but its tone leans
more to the light-hearted, which is perhaps right for the general theme of
the film where love and kindness is triumpment. It’s a film about love
rather than hate and therefore it’s aim isn’t to bring 1930s German
society to task for its role in Hitler’s rise to power and show the true
horrors of the holocaust. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It’s a committed and passionate piece
of work by Waititi who plays Hitler as this camp, zany individual. It’s a
passionate project, but one that could have dived more into German
society and become more biting of a satire, yet it has emotional weight
and power.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-32046537206568438512020-04-21T19:35:00.000+01:002020-04-21T19:35:02.675+01:00Little Women<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:84390710/">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9d/Little_Women_(2019_film).jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="259" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9d/Little_Women_(2019_film).jpeg" width="216" /></a></div>
I can’t say I knew too much about the story of <i>Little Women </i>except it
was based on the lives of four sisters in and round the American Civil
War. Going in fresh in one of the most widely read and frequently
adapted novels probably put me in the minority but going in fresh meant I
could enjoy the story with no prior knowledge.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Greta Gerwig’s
solo directorial debut <i>Lady Bird </i>was a hit that had a large appeal among
audiences and even garnered a few Oscar nominations. It was a fine
debut by Gerwig who follows up her semi-biographical coming of age tale
with a coming of age tale set in and around the American Civil War.
Based on the lives of four sisters, and adapted from the novel by Louisa
May Alcott, Gerwig charts the lives of the four sisters, brilliantly
intercutting their lives before and after the American Civil War.<br />
<br />
The
Crisscrossing of different eras has attracted some criticism among the
more traditional fans who feel that diverting from the linear narrative may
make it confusing for those who know little about the story. Contrary,
editing the narrative between the different eras was clear and easy to
follow and in one big example the juxtaposition of the narrative and
the contrasting fates made the most moving sequence of the film so
emotionally devastating. The way it led up to this heartbreaking moment
with clever editing resulted in an incredibly impactful ending.<br />
<br />
Working
once again with Greta Gerwig, Saorsie Ronan (Jo) leads the four sisters
with a remarkable central performance. Determined and independent, Jo
is the least material driven of the four sisters, her refusal to follow
the cultural norms and stand up against traditional norms speaks volumes
on the current voice of feminism. Though her refusal to follow these
norms, whilst inspiring, leaves her to feel the least happy and most
lonely of the sisters. Ronan shares an intoxicating, romantic friendship
with Timothee Chalamet’s Laurie (who is somewhat rather annoying at
times) which drives a small rivalry with her young sister, Amy (Florence
Pugh) who also harbours feelings for him.<br />
<br />
Integral to the film is
the relationship shared by the four sisters (played by Ronan, Pugh,
Emma Watson and relative new-comer Eliza Scanlen). Each of the stars
share a terrific chemistry that allows the sisters close and loving
relationship with one another feel genuine and real. It helps the
audience feel the warmth of their loving relationship that at times felt
tested from loss and war, a war which has taken their father away. Because
the sisters' relationship is so beautifully crafted, you strongly
experience every one of their experiences of loss and loneliness.<br />
<br />
Exquisitely
written and directed, Gerwig excels crafting a wonderfully designed
drama with a powerful story, terrific set and costume design and
incredible performances.</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-37112131270953780542019-12-31T17:32:00.001+00:002019-12-31T17:32:40.106+00:00Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:83032954/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Star_Wars_The_Rise_of_Skywalker_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Star_Wars_The_Rise_of_Skywalker_poster.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I didn’t like The Last Jedi. Not because of the narrative or any
risks taken by the director, but the fact that the film treated its
villains with such a lack of respect that the supposedly diabolical
First Order looked like it was run at a bunch of buffoons, especially
General Hux. When the evil force is one big joke, how are we supposed to
take the threat they pose seriously? There were, of course other flaws
but the main problem was the lack of threat posed by The First Order. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Whatever
your personal reaction to The Last Jedi you can’t deny it was devisive.
Some people loved it and some hated and those who hated are incredible
vocally about them hating it. Therefore it feels somewhat strangely
pandering that The Rise of Skywalker explicitly undoes aspects of the
previous film, namely the sidelining of Rose (though I doubt there is
anything in this) and dialogue where Luke says one must respect a Jedi’s
weapon (having thrown one into the sea in the last film).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For me,
it was never about the risk taking as the lack of risks taken is a
major issue of Abrams' The Rise of Skywalker. It feels too safe, there
could have many directions it could have taken which may have had a more
profoundly moving effect (there’s also a lack of emotional pay-off if
you feel that a character could easily be bought back to life). It feels
as though the film has been made to appeal to the biggest possible
audience, but at the same time it’s lack of bold risking taking and
obvious firefighting leaves the film feeling rather anti-climatic and a
disappointing conclusion to a disjointed and inconsistent trilogy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
Rise of Skywalker does have it moments. Ian McDiarmid makes a welcome
return as Darth Sidious/Palpatine and Richard E Grant channels the Peter
Cushing role rather well (in fact I rather we had him play a constant
role instead of sending General Hux down a terrible character
trajectory). The film’s breathless and frantic pace leads little time
for boredom, but its frantic pace also leaves little time for build up
and character development as new characters names are forgotten as soon
as the movie is finished (for example whoever Keri Russell played). As a
film it feels as though its trying to rectify past errors and appease
the fanbase as a result it is too busy pleasing people that it has lost
its magic that was evident in the franchise’s first film. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In
terms of where the film ranks among the Star Wars franchise, it’s right
near the bottom. I actually have more affinity with the original prequel
franchise than I do with the latest trilogy. The stars Daisy Ridley,
John Boyega and Oscar Isaac all do a fine job but, perhaps its my age, I
will never have the same affinity with them as the other characters
from the other trilogies.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-25939629759559336992019-12-31T17:30:00.000+00:002019-12-31T17:30:19.792+00:00Black Christmas<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:82402483/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/22/Black_Christmas_2019_teaser_poster.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/22/Black_Christmas_2019_teaser_poster.png" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This year’s Black Christmas is the second remake of the original film
from 1974. Where the 1974 original film used the slasher blueprint
effectivly, long before John Carpenter’s Halloween, the 2006 remake was
pretty forgettable and generic slasher flick. The 2019 is a different
beast, it tries to step away from the generic slasher and bring in a
more modern take by dealing with topical themes of sexism, assault and
female empowerment. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I was looking forward to this, but the film
is colossally disappointing. Whilst I felt that some aspects of the PTSD
from the sexual assault is interesting, but the majority of the films
‘wokeness’ (I hate using the word) feels as though it was written by a
right-wing blogger whose aim was to satirise the “snowflake” generation.
It painful obnoxiousness takes so much away from what would have been a
potentially interesting take on the pressures put on women in a collage
environment. I buy the idea that a white, rich young man has the
privilege to get away with crimes but the film’s nauseating dialogue and
heavy-handed take on the important issues at hand feel cheap and
lacking in sincerity. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For a film about female empowerment,
relationships and everyday issues (from the minor to the major) the
relationships between the “sisters” are pretty boring. Individually, the
performances are fine, but together they have no real chemistry. They
don’t feel like a group of real friends, more a collection of actors who
haven’t really been given the time to build a rapport together. In the
leading role is Imogen Poots who works wonders with the poor script
bringing a level empathy to her character and the terrible position she
is in.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Even as a horror film Black Christmas is a failure. A PG-13
movie doesn’t automatically mean that the film is a failure because a
rating doesn’t stop you building a creepy, foreboding atmosphere.
However, despite the winter setting the atmosphere is certainly not
chilling. It’s so lacking in the chill factor that the first murder
weapon really should have melted. The kills themselves are bloodless and
unimaginative as the sorority girls are picked off one by one by a
masked and hooded killer. To the film’s credit there was enough material
to warrant a remake, I think it would have been refreshing to bring in
21st century topical themes to the slasher genre but not in a way that
is reminiscent of right wing blogger trying to take the piss.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-8226509357574820002019-12-31T17:26:00.004+00:002019-12-31T17:26:56.479+00:00Knives Out<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:81322504/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1f/Knives_Out_poster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1f/Knives_Out_poster.jpeg" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many of the Poirot movies always end up with him, played by a Brit
with an exaggerated French-Belgian accent (think David Suchet and Peter
Urnistov), magically reaching his eureka moment and solving the most
impossible of crimes. A strangely cherished childhood memory is one
where, on a wet, rainy day in Wales, I watched Evil Under the Sun on ITV
and the image of a man in black speedos is implanted in my memory that
it’s the only thing I really remember. about the film. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The staple
Agatha Christie, ensemble crime movies have a certain formula. There is
the victim, the numerous culprits who all have a motive whether its
greed, vengeance, love, jealousy, rage and a wily, old fox whose
brilliant mind finds the most minute of clues. This Poirot like role,
which has been played by Kenneth Branagh and John Malkovich of late, is
played in delightfully theatrical style by Daniel Craig who has fun
adopting this cartoonish southern drawl which suits his character’s
eccentric style.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Craig has so much fun, as do a lot of the cast
who have a blast playing their broad caricatures. Most of them are given
a notable characteristic and the performers enjoy working with material
that’s packed with moments of melodrama and comedy that allow them to
just enjoy playing their characters. It’s this clear pleasure of working
on such a fun film that manages to radiate itself from the screen and
allow the audiences to enjoy in trying to guess when the next twist will
come. Like the best who-dunnits, the clues are presented tantalisingly
before us so when the final reveal is made, it’s a satisfying one
(especially when you’ve accidentally clocked the truth).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As
smartly written the film is the performance of Ana De Armas is key. Like
Cleo in Roma, Marta is never truly part of the family. Her immigrant
status makes her an outcast in the Thrombey family. Whilst some are
civil to her, the majority of the family either ignore or place her on
the spot during an immigration debate (often changing her nationality
each time they reference it). It’s only Harlon (Christopher Plummer) who
treats her as an equal, almost like a friend and close companion and it
gives the film someone for us to get behind against the terrible
family. Ana De Armas carries this role really well and her relationship
with Harlon (who easily could have been presented as an evil
authoritarian figure) is generally quite poignant.</div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-17453157096514242942019-12-31T17:24:00.001+00:002019-12-31T17:24:41.356+00:00Ford Vs Ferarri<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:79945200/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a4/Ford_v._Ferrari_(2019_film_poster).png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="356" data-original-width="240" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a4/Ford_v._Ferrari_(2019_film_poster).png" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For the uninitiated, Le Mans is a pretty big deal. It makes up one of
the races you have to win to earn the Triple Crown of Motorsport
(Monaco Grand Prix and Indy 500 make up the other two) of which only one
driver, Graham Hill, has ever won. The film is centred around the 1966
24 Hours of Le Mans, focusing on Ford’s on track and off-track battle
with super car company Ferrari (who had previously won the past five
races at Le Mans). In a bid to put a halt to the fledging sales, Ford
decide to bring in Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) to help them build a car
that will beat Ferrari at Le Mans and he knows just the guy who could
win it for them, only problem is this guy, Ken Miles (Christian Bale),
isn’t Ford material. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you ever go to a go-kart track, or any
racing venue (in the UK at least), you will always see a sign that warns
of the dangers of motorsport. Motorsport is deadly, and the 60s was a
particularly deadly time for the sport and there is always this air
hanging over the film that something nasty is looming. The film manages
this well because it keeps it subtle enough for those who don’t know
anything about motorsport and will be left shocked by the horrendous
accidents and those who know of the sport’s deadliest years can sense
something may happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This uneasy feeling stems from the intensity
of the racing scenes. It’s also an etched on the face of Ken Miles’ son
(especially having witnessed Ken’s own massive accident). Like the
Formula 1 thriller Rush (about the James Hunt – Niki Lauda rivalry), Le
Mans captures the excitement, danger, romance and the allure of racing
on the very edge, potentially being one second, or one tiny error away,
from death. The danger is captured in the ferocious, fiery accidents,
and excitement captured in the brilliant editing and sound design that
puts you right in the centre of Ken Miles’ daring drive to the finish
line.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of course, this isn’t just a racing movie. The film has
appeal to fans and non-fans of the sport alike. There’s a good, poignant
father-son relationship which gives the film some emotional weight.
It’s far more interesting than the husband-wife relationship which feels
like a rather lame attempt to not ignore women entirely. There’s also a
battle between the mechanics and drivers with the executives of Ford
which can be seen as a battle between art and commerce. Whilst the Ford
executives are seen as the bad guys getting in the way of sporting
passion and integrity, it’s strange the film attempts to sell them as an
underdog when they’re one of the biggest car companies in the world.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
However,
this is a minor problem because you’re supporting Carroll Shelby and
Ken Miles all the way, hoping they’d stick to those business minded,
smug Ford executives whose ugly cars in their ugly factories are a world
away from the beauty and romance of racing. They are presented somewhat
as the pantomime villains, especially Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas) whose
constant meddling in the racing craft of both Miles and Shelby shows
Ford value branding and marketing over unaltered sporting success. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
sometimes strained, but always respectful relationship between Shelby
and Miles is perfectly captured by the effective Bale-Damon chemistry.
The performances of both Damon and Bale (it’s odd seeing him with a
British accent even though he is British) help keep their partnership
one that’s enjoyable to watch. The performances are great, but credit
has to go to James Mangold who helms the action brilliantly, making sure
even non-racing fans find the racing thrilling in a film that never
runs out of gas.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4/5 </div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-64038000524664670462019-12-31T17:21:00.001+00:002019-12-31T17:21:08.223+00:00Midway<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/55/Midway_Movie_HD_Poster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="376" data-original-width="254" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/55/Midway_Movie_HD_Poster.jpeg" width="216" /></a></div>
<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:79616323/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Pacific War has been popular in America cinema since the day the
Japanese air force attacked Pearl Harbor. This ‘sneak attack’ on a date
that will ‘live in infamy’ was instantly a sore point for America so the
depiction of the Japanese army in 40s films like Wake Island and many
others were frequently vile, racist, and lacking in the depth that
German characters were depicted with in films like The Mortal Storm.
Things have gotten better but for every Letters from Iwo Jima you’d get a
few Hacksaw Ridges, but overall the depiction is far better.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It
is to the film’s credit that the depiction of the Japanese is one of the
more positive of late, in fact they’re just as well developed as their
American counterparts, but you could argue that’s not saying much
because the Americans themselves are nothing more than broad
caricatures. Harmful stereotypes (of which there are many on the
Japanese) are generally avoided and they’re even given an opportunity to
show their bravery and dedication to their homeland. Though, they don’t
get away scott-free as they’re shown to have a brutal side and their
massacres of Chinese civilians isn’t ignored entirely. It’s not subtle,
but it goes a long way.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Americans aren’t presented with much
depth or subtlety either. Even though the characters are based on real
people, they’re painted with such broad strokes they don’t feel like
real people. The central character’s, Richard Halsey Best (Ed Skrein),
main attributes are he is reckless, cocky and chews gum. It’s a shame
because these heroes are deserving of better representation but the
dreadful dialogue, lacking in nuance and subtly, doesn’t allow for this.
Women fare the worst as the likes of Mandy Moore are left with nothing
to do other than worry about her husband and make the occasional
late-night sandwich (this line was hilariously lacking in
self-awareness).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yet I never really expected anything more from
Roland Emmerich. Grounded realism isn’t something you’ll find from the
director of Godzilla, Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow. The
characters may be so broadly depicted they don’t feel remotely real but
the brilliant and generally exciting dog fights and bombing raids are so
well done they greatly exhibit the bravery, doggedness of all involved.
It is, therefore, a shame that script doesnt anything insightful to
say.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Having watched the film at the time most of the country is
reflecting on those who dedicated their lives for their country it’s
hard not to be moved and appreciate a film about them slightly more than
it deserves to be appreciated.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
3/5 </div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-90056416026921959732019-12-31T17:16:00.003+00:002019-12-31T17:17:29.099+00:00Rambo: Last Blood<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:75018689/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b1/Rambo_-_Last_Blood_official_theatrical_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="325" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b1/Rambo_-_Last_Blood_official_theatrical_poster.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Politics influence movies and movies influence politics. It has
always been a fact. Even the first Rambo was a politically driven film
which examined America’s attitude towards Vietnam veterans returning
home, abandoned by their government and vilified by certain quarters for
being ‘child killers’. Rambo: First Blood came at a time America began
to really look at its involvement in Vietnam, films like The Deer
Hunter, Platoon and Rambo looked at the American psyche following its
loss of innocence as images of war were beamed into every living room
with a TV.<br />
<a name='more'></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rambo: First Blood was an inward-looking film. It
looked at America’s problems from the inside as John Rambo was harassed
by law enforcement who have no concern of his war credentials.
Traumatised and alone, Rambo found himself hunted in densely wooded
area. Rambo: Last Blood doesn’t really bother with any of this. Instead
it seems to be film that wants to look elsewhere rather than the ills
within America.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It may be a flippant reaction to the film, but I
could not help but think “this is why Trump wants the wall”. The moment
Gabriela enters into Mexico we presented with a rundown, scary, crime
infested village where dangerous men leer and drink on the street. All
Mexicans, except two, are either gangsters, criminals or sex trafficked
victims. Normally, I don’t get too fussed by this, but if you factor in
the current American political discourse (dominated by Trump’s bigotry)
you can’t help but feel this representation is a little problematic as
many of Trump’s supporters will see this a confirmation of why a wall is
needed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I don’t think for a second that the film is actively
campaigning for a giant wall to be built and neither do I feel it’s
problematic enough to be called ‘racist’ (American cinema has always
depicted “others” as faceless enemies from the Russian to Arabs and even
the British) however it’s just the highly toxic times that American
politics finds itself in that makes this movie’s content feel tone deaf.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film doesn’t shy away from the gore and doesn’t pick bums on
seats over giving a Rambo loving audience exactly what they want
(though I do think they actually miss what makes the first one so
great). It’s a brutally violent film that dishes out ultraviolence to
the worst of the worst (a problem in itself as the film is more
concerned about vengeance than empathy with the victims). Still,
Stallone is only fine form – the man sure is intimidating when angry.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2.5/5 </div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-532892627661667062019-12-31T17:14:00.002+00:002019-12-31T17:14:49.083+00:00Gemini Man<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:77207466/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/GeminiManPoster.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/GeminiManPoster.jpeg" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ang Lee is trying to change the way we view movies. His previous
effort Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk was, in part, shot at 120FPS. His
latest effort, Gemini Man, was entirely shot at 120FPS. The problem
with this is only a select few cinemas have the capability to screen
films at this framerate. This means only a select few people saw the
film as it was intended by the director. Those who did see the film at
120FPS complained that it made the film loo ‘fake’ or ‘soap operary’.
Whilst I didn’t watch it at 120FPS I can imagine it looked like watching
films/TV on my uncle’s massive HD TV for the first time where it looked
like everything was filmed in front of a really bad green screen.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It
might be because the film was shot with the intention of being screened
at 120FPS that aspects of the film don’t look right when screened at a
wrong frame rate, particularly the hand to hand combat scenes. Whilst
the fact that they were mostly shot in dark, confined spaces (a small
room, a sewer, etc) the jerky movements (of the clones in particular)
feel unreal – much like how the big Neo Vs Agent Smith fight felt in The
Matrix Reloaded. The movements just don’t feel human, and it’s hard to
tell whether it was international or not which makes it rather
distracting.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The iffy look of the film could have easily been
ignored if the script and story were any good, but they weren’t. This
film has been 22 years in the making and you would have expected
something more out of this. The dialogue is mostly exposition,
explaining why someone did this and how someone did what they did. There
are interesting themes about how the use of clones negates the use of
real people, with real families, but the counterpoint that clones also
have emotions is wanting because Will Smith’s clone (Junior) emotional
side of the story is lacking (it’s weak compared to how A.I. crafted an
emotional story about a human like robot).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I don’t think it helps
that Will Smith plays his clone like he is mentally challenged. I can’t
tell if its bad acting or a decision Will Smith made. That said, even
his performance as Henry Brogan is so lacking in energy that it remined
me of his bland turn in After Earth. The supporting cast isn’t much
better, Clive Owen makes for a dull villain and Mary Elizabeth Winstead
makes for a dull ally. At least Benedict Wong turns in a decent
performance as the comic relief in a movie sorely lacking jokes that
don’t make you wince.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The most impressive sequence is the superbly
shot motorbike chase in the Colombian village (in which a motorbike is
used inventively as a weapon), however I can’t think of anything that
stuck out as positively noteworthy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2.5/5 </div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-4064247490928832082019-12-31T17:10:00.004+00:002019-12-31T17:10:46.102+00:00The Irishman<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/The_Irishman_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="382" data-original-width="261" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/The_Irishman_poster.jpg" width="218" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When you’ve left your own personal stamp on an entire genre, you are
entitled to say whatever you damn well please without some Marvel fanboy
dismissing your entire filmography because you didn’t like a film they
like. Not that I agree entirely with his comments, but the fact Martin
Scorsese has cemented his place in movie history by influencing an
entire genre, Scorsese’s opinions should be respected.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Once Upon a
Time in Hollywood was a change in tact for Quentin Tarantino whose
musings over age showed a more mature side of him. Martin Scorsese’s The
Irishman also shows a different side to the director. The Irishman is
more slower paced than his fast-edited gangster films like Goodfelles
and Gangs of New York as The Irishman is more completive and reflective
film about age, morality and life choices. It marks a change from
Scorsese as his epic tale about crime leaves us in no doubt that it will
only end in loneliness and regret. His films have often dealt with
themes of guilt but not quite in the same reflective way.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Clocking
in at over 200 minutes, the film’s colossal length is what makes the
final third of the film so effective. Alone and living with regret over a
bitter life of crime, Frank Sheeran spends the final few years of his
life with only nurses and a priest for company. After a lifetime of
fearing him, his daughters never visit him. His relationship with his
eldest daughter, the mostly mute Peggy (Anna Paquin), is most
irreparable as she wants nothing to do with him. Paquin hasn’t got a lot
to do, but her screen presence and powerful stare means her silence
says more than any words can.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The final third marks a complete
change in tone for the film. The first two thirds, told in flashback, is
laced with dark humour – much like a man chuckling when telling his
personal anecdotes. Even though the pace and editing is slower than a
standard Scorsese gangster film, it still feels like a Scorsese picture.
It’s not until the last thirty minutes when everything changes and it
becomes a powerful and reflective film that could mark Scorsese signing
off from epic crime tales.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like Once Upon a time in America, The
Irishman is an epic tale that spans across several different decades.
Casting the likes of Al Pacino, Joe Pesci (persuaded out of retirement)
and Robert de Niro presents problems because the actors are too old to
convincingly play their younger selves. To get around the issue,
Scorsese has embraced de-aging technology (ironically perfected by
Marvel) to recreate the actors’ younger selves. It’s not perfect, but
its convincing enough even if there are times their faces don’t look
like the come from the same time as their bodies (particularly the hands
which look they belong to an older person than the face suggests).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
performances are mostly exceptional. De Niro is perfectly understated,
and Joe Pesci radiates menace even though he’s dialled down his usual
energetic style. Al Pacino is slightly hammier than the others, but he’s
also fun to watch. However, the surprise performer is Anna Paquin whose
performances says a lot with so little dialogue. Encompassing several
decades allows for the production designs and costume designers to shine
by perfecting the set and costumes for the different eras. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4.5/5 </div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1282345477542778584.post-797370880088928742019-12-31T17:08:00.000+00:002019-12-31T17:08:04.863+00:00Doctor Sleep<div class="body-text -prose collapsible-text" data-full-text-url="/s/full-text/viewing:78784725/" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cf/Doctor_Sleep_(Official_Film_Poster).png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="220" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cf/Doctor_Sleep_(Official_Film_Poster).png" width="215" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Stephen King’s distain for Stanley Kubrick’s 1980 film is pretty
legendary, he much prefers the version that came out in 1997 as it was
much closer to the book. He is, however, very much in the minority as
Kubrick’s version only gets more and more popular with age. Such is the
popularity of the 1980 film, director Mike Flanagan makes a film that’s
an adaptation of the king novel and a sequel to the 1980 film. </div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The
film sees Danny (Ewan McGregor) trying to supress the memories of his
dark past. Drugs and alcohol help numb the pain, but when he decides to
rid him of drink and drugs he is contacted by Abra Stone (Kyliegh
Curran) who possesses the same abilities. However, she draws the
attention of a strange, vampire like clan named True Knot who use the
‘steam’ of people with Shining to live for eternity and Abra has a lot
of ‘stream’.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the reasons Stephen King did not like
Kubrick’s adaption of his book was the fact it toned down the
supernatural – leaving it more ambiguous. In trying to adapt King’s
novel and make a sequel to the 1980 film, Flanagan keeps a lot of the
novel’s supernatural aspects but makes modifications to make the film
fall in line with the Kubrick film. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
True knot are much like a
vampire clan, they need a specific substance to survive and they are led
by Rose the Hat (played by Rebecca Ferguson is a suitably chilling and
menacing performance). The emotional core of the film is anchored by a
terrific performance by Kyliegh Curran. Much like the mutants from the
X-Men series, her incredible gifts make her a target, even her own
parents eye her as different. Ewan McGregor also delivers a good
performance, but Danny’s alcoholism feels a half-baked and too easily
discarded.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film is lacking in scares, but one could argue as a
counter point that it wasn’t that type of horror film. Yet, there are a
number of shocking scenes (the baseball boy’s death is pretty
harrowing), and Ferguson makes for a devilish villain, but it never
truly ventures into horror that same why The Shining did. The tone and
aim of the film is different, the supernatural is much more in your face
and it certainly won’t stand up as much to repeat viewings and bring
out many different interpretations.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The film is also a sequel to
The Shining and being a geek, director Mile Flanagan gives us plenty of
knowing nods to the film. The trip back to the Overlook hotel is a
delight (he even directly homages some of the more famous scenes).
Familiar characters return but the actors put their own spin on them,
though Alexandra Essoe’s performance is so similar to Shelly Duvall’s
it’s almost a perfect mirror image of the real thing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4/5 </div>
</div>
Myerlahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00772428029534463716noreply@blogger.com0