After hanging out with some relatives of mine over the weekend, I caught a charming Disney film called
Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3. The grand tale about this vivacious d-
Normally, a highly-acclaimed film is renowned for its emotionally-moving scenarios, depth to their characters, or push the boundaries in terms of its story. With exceptions, many popularized titles in the Video Game World can often seem the reverse. Entertainment through the means of gameplay can end up the ringleader for general audiences, as it’s more easily understood than abstract ideas, and well-constructed stories/writing can all too often be left secondary to the Moment-To-Moment Thrills. But less focus on narrative isn’t necessarily a drawback if properly executed. For something naturally inspired by Video Games, it’s oddly invigorating to see a movie that doesn’t hide so intently behind the guise of a story to deliver daisy-chains of ludicrous action. Is this movie an exception to its medium?
Hardcore Henry has a story. And I’d place it highly…among the catalog of Capcom Titles: A Silly Antagonist who wakes up early with an army of Supersoldiers, and its cybernetic protagonist may as well be you. Shot all in First-Person, henry finds himself on a Quest purely to stay alive, and left mute outside of body language. Were this story all the film focused on from beginning to end, I’d regard it the same as an Uwe Boll flick. Thankfully, it’s hardly that.
I think volume of action versus story plays a role. It’s comparable to how classic platformers like Sonic or Mario platformers leave only brief splotches of story, and
Henry behaves with the same mantra. On the other hand, there’s much room for opportunity since the alternating between juvenile and stereotypical acting still plays a significant role. To its credit, the later part of
Henry comes with notable twists in the second act and beyond to keep it from being a one-note massacre, and the premise works as a great basis for insane action pieces, particularly with an end that takes “Over-The-Top” to great length. The High-Action Low-Dialogue film style isn’t a novelty, with Mad Mad: Fury Road as a recent example; However, Henry shares ingredients of its success through creative action scenes(the road scene halfway through comes to mind) and clever small touches go a long way.
Directors can use framed camera angles to place focus and emphasis on a character/event in creative ways. So what’s the fate of handheld(or in this case, head-mounted)? A setup like this obviously won’t work for everything, in the same way
Birdman or
Rope’s use of All-In-One-Shotting could only work somewhere fairly enclosed, where migrating between the narrative voids of space and time is kept to a minimum. Similarly, Henry tends to have specific settings that chart along from one to another akin to a theme park. Small touches like his FPS-Style Hand movements give an uncanny game-y vibe that‘s practically non-existent in movies, outside that one redeemable scene from
Doom. The story even progresses in terms of combat: From stealth & melee, to bringing out the big guns, and unconventional methods that *only* Henry could do.
The director uses some clever cuts to transition between prosthetic pieces like the cybernetics inside henry’s hand, the rest with more conventional edits and long takes. As far as staying first-person, there’s an intensity added to its action and immersion to the setting that you simply can’t get elsewhere. The rise of VR(if it does indeed rise) will certainly make a splash in that department. At the very least, it’s a proof of concept - a stepping stone to greater things within the same point of view. Would there be a
Silent Hill without a
Resident Evil?
Hardcore Henry is far from perfect, but it’s certainly an underrated experiment. As with anything else in arts and entertainment, what’s renowned or rubbish is all a matter of perspective.
Planes, Trains, & Automobiles is good.
Very good, in fact. Steve Martin finds the only way to reach his business destination involves the inadvertent help from his complete opposite(Played by John Candy). For the first 20 minutes, I’d mostly gone on the assumption that it’d become just another odd couple movie, and a large portion of this goes that way. To be fair, the gags in the movie are rather clever and play off the characters’ differences with an absurdist style and situational variety that feels like classic comedy. As it goes on though, I could tell there’s more to this movie than just a Joke-A-Thon.
The two characters might be simplistic, but how they interact as a duo and alone almost seem like a commentary on the effects of beliefs & philosophies on the world around us. A Pessimist won’t make friends easily, but may be more wary of dangerous scenarios. Optimists can be a bit dreamy, but can use their joie de vivre to add joy to those around them - not unlike a bard boosts a party’s spirits. Starting off in Neal’s perspective makes it easier to be bugged by Candy, but is this simply a rough first impression?
We have our beliefs, and they shape our actions - or at least what options we see available. It’s easy enough to justify Steve Martin’s cynicism when they’re conjoined by the hip, but being left to their own devices makes a glum attitude’s outcome left in full view. By the end, it felt like a genuine social bond had formed between them after subsiding their differences. The growth toward adapting to other beliefs branches out into relationships as well. Finding someone with common interests is great. But if yours and theirs are identical, there’s little social exploration to be found. Even if we may not care them all the time, a true friend can open sides of yourself you weren’t aware existed, and maybe learn a thing or two about a thing or two. That’s poetry, bro.
Even if a feels bomb isn’t your jive, it’s still a fun popcorn film - those certainly rank high enough on people’s movie shelves. If you don’t mind a bit of heart in a crazy comedy, you’re in for a good time.
Bram Stoker‘s
Dracula. On paper, much of the movie sounds like a bonafide winner: All-Star cast(Anthony Hopkins, Winona Rider, that one guy who played Sirius Black), Coppola in the Director‘s Chair, and a classical story that popularized a genre obsessed with the nature of fear. So why isn’t this considered a superb adaptation, next to
Lord of The Rings,
Great Expectations, & Earlier Disney Films?
Well.
Translating a Book to Screenplay isn’t a rare condition in this day and age. Making a *superb* adaptation becomes the greater challenge, and
Dracula’s cardinal sin may be playing it a bit too close to the source material. The successful (and similar) series
Penny Dreadful comes off as something that could’ve plausibly existed back then due to its performance and more believable sets. The characters in
Dracula feel true to the book, but almost unyielding to that end; There’s a rigidity here in performance that makes it feel closer to classic recitations at a stage play, the illusory wall of suspended disbelief a bit less existent. Though with that said, not all’s been lost in translation with Coppola’s Victorian debut: Dracula’s sanguine story leaves plenty of room for visually fantastic effects, and key scenes are rife with phantasmagoric imagery and dark eroticisms.
Wait, Frank really shot a topless blood orgy scene? Well I can’t say no to that, huh?
The best scenes aren’t just comprised of shock and awe. The infamous Dinner Scene(which was recreated Shot-For-Shot in Video Game form) shows deft ability in Shadow Play technique, something traced as early as Curtiz’ studio films(
Casablanca), and is my favorite part of Keanu’s role. Reeves feels typecast in
John Wick, but a young Keanu feels slightly miscast for
Dracula. He plays great as the naïve neophyte at the Dinner scene, but I don’t think the Elizabethan dialogue fits him very well. It feels a bit goofy with some of Hopkins’ too, but it’s far less apparent there than with Neo. There’s something about the vibe of
Dracula that borders closely to B-Movie quality, but there’s also plenty of greatness to dig in as well.
Relying too heavily on the book and some acting missteps puts a dent in the experience, but much of its retelling still makes for a good watch. It‘s also neat seeing what Dracula’s inspired in later mass media:
Bloodborne fans may notice the origins for one of the game’s bizarre headgear(and perhaps a hidden character’s ivory dress, but this may just be coincidence). It was a bumpy trip, but still one hell of a spooky ride. A guilty pleasure’s still a pleasure, after all.
The Quickies
Morgan Freeman says hello to an old woman in
Driving Miss Daisy, though she’s no John Candy. It’s an Odd couple story about an old couple, and has a strange charm to it. Interesting use of color palette(Daisy and her son’s wardrobe match the house in one scene), and a mirror scene later on feels like something Orson would’ve cooked up. The ending makes me want to cry in a good way. Old people are the shizznit. lol
Great MovieThe Rock. About on par with
The Hunt For Red October - great action scenes, strong enough acting, and it may be my favorite Cage role to date. Ed Harris’s antagonist feels reminiscent of
Modern Warfare 2. It remains the only Michael Bay movie I can suggest a watch for, so that’s something.
Great Bayhem MovieFour Weddings & A Funeral. As satirical as
Election, but far more lighthearted. It’s become one of my favorite romantic comedies. If you fancy a fuck, you’ll love the first 2 minutes.
Funny Lovey-Dovey MovieSharknado Too much bad acting, not enough Sharknado. It didn’t subvert my expectations, but it did subtract from them.
Try Fishing ElsewhereThe Man Who Knew Too Much. A great example of Hitchcock using music as a literal narrative instrument, attached to a scenario with lots of misdirection and feeding on paranoia. Yep, sounds like Hitchcock. Not Quite
Vertigo or
Psycho good, Better than
Sabotage, On Par with
Moo Moo and The Three Sisters: Let The Magic Meow YouMoo out of MooJohn Wick. A Neo-Noir Graphic Novel-y movie that juggles Gun Fu, A Puppy, and a fairly grounded premise for what may as well be superhero storytelling. Fans of
The Darkness,
Drive and
Max Payne will dig it. The plot’s fairly straightforward after the first act or so, but the action sequences are surprisingly creative; One’s very reminiscent of
Kingsman: Secret Service, while another finds a clever use for a recent injury. John may not be breaking ground, but it’s far more satisfying than the last few batches of comic book movies I’ve seen.
Great Movie Plus PuppyPuppy LoveThe Inside StoryOne last thing:
I’m hardly the first to grow up with the classics:
Beauty & The Beast,
The Prince of Egypt,
Bambi,
The Rescuers Down Under,
The Iron Giant,
The Lion King, and the list stretches on. At least back in the late 80’s, they were bound in those quaint oversized plastic VHS covers which were meant to resemble a storybook - a great fit to say the least. My mom imparted an innumerable volume of family movies, something I was very thankful for. Disney Renaissance aside, one in particular stood out after so many years -
The Secret of NIMH.
-------------------------------------------------------
It all started with a mouse. The first thing that jumped out at me during the rewatch were the distinct facial expressions of Mrs. Brisby. Characters like Jerry can be a bit more cartoonish, but there’s a very heartfelt and earnest disposition in Brisby that feels so rare in contrast to much of the
current western front. You can tell frame-by-frame that they’ve put a constant, painstaking effort in emotional context for each moment - drawing physical movement by itself isn’t quite enough. The final result isn’t just achieved through visuals, as Hartman makes for the perfect voice actress for that role - the sincerity and motherliness really shines in her performance.
Secret of NIMH’s soundtrack still gives me the willies. Jerry Goldsmith’s discography includes both
Patton and
Alien - the ominous nature of
Alien perhaps its only similarity toward
NIMH. The intensity of key scenes are in large part due to Jerry’s compositions: The “Dragon” encounter wildly jumps between the growing tension of viola strings, and the bursting fanfare of trumpets with seamless effort. The enduring Leitmotif of “Flying Dreams” may have been meant to remind Brisby(and vicariously, us) of what she’s fighting for, as the world of NIMH becomes even more daunting. Home is where the heart is, after all. It’s a beautiful piece in either case, and the
soundtrack is impeccable.
I’d forgotten the vivid detail in these painted backgrounds - the auburn sunsets outside almost look like they’re on fire, and the journey downward into the rats’ nest borders on phantasmagoric. Here's the
Brutus Sequence: There’s a shot where she may as well be running through a kaleidoscope, tangled in webs of dusk. Started noticing some visual parallels to previous Disney films to boot: There’s a shot of the kids visible only through a
string of bubbles, matching a major scene from
Cinderella. The tendrils entering near the Great Owl *might* be a nod to the final charge toward Maleficent in
Sleeping Beauty. They’d learned from the best, and created something altogether new. Secret of NIMH certainly holds aspects of fairy tales, but felt, and
feels a bit more dark and contemporary than typical animated fare.
Still enjoying the comedic bits with Jerry & Mrs. Brisby, even if DeLuise can be a bit overbearing. Having comedy play out more realistically feels very refreshing, juxtaposed to modern CG films which be a bit too aware of its own audience at the risk of pandering. It makes the story much harder to digest. Although Bluth pushed Jenner’s role a bit higher as a notable villain compared to the book, he isn’t toted around as the sole force of nature against Brisby & The Rats; Ultimately I found the story’s thought experiment, and its consequences toward the rats more interesting than a homeostatic brute. The rats’ origin of intellect was, and is very novel. Talking animals aren’t anything new in Family/Kids movies where you simply just go with it, but few try to express it in plausible terms; It’s not ignored, but an integral part of the narrative. The twist feels reminiscent of a lesser-known film called
Fantastic Planet, which places humans in the role of figurative lab rats to a larger alien race. So, the amulet. *Is* this a Deus Ex Machina? Personally, I’d vote no - the logistics of super fantastical sparkly aren’t gone into great detail, but it’s clear early on that The Occult-Like Nicodemus(and posthumously, Jonathon) meant it as a spiritual destiny for Ms. Brisby. So as far as potentially contrived narrative points go, I’m not super mad.
The movie makes me absolutely thrilled to watch it, and a bit distressed after coming back to 2016. Is this one of the last gems of a dying era for Detailed Hand-Drawn animation in the west? Perhaps not. Don Bluth’s already funded the Proof-Of-Concept kickstarter for Dragon’s Lair Returns, though I’m curious how a full featured version of that may look like in terms of story. Though done digitally, The recent
Song of the Sea(and assumably
The Secret of Kells) shares many of
NIMH’s traits as well, particularly drawing genuine emotions onto the characters - they're far more tangible than most will see from western shtick. Better to get back to the movie, though.
To the animation industry, this movie was a return to form that used the best of early Disney films’ techniques(and plenty of new ones) to create something thought-provoking, emotional, and unerringly unique. Plenty of films entertain, some impress, but so very few can humble someone as was apparent with
The Secret of NIMH. For myself at that age, it helped break a previous notion that animated film was confined to narrative, thematic, and tonal limitations. For young and old, then and now,
The Secret of NIMH remains a Diamond in the Rough.
Final Rating For Secret Of NIMH
The Source of Inspiration, Bewildering Feminism, And The Gift of Gratuitous Motion)
Guess I’d use “Surrealism” to describe the aesthetics for Wes Anderson’s Grand Hotel Budapest, but it’s worth pointing out this isn’t the nightmarish type that seems more common in those types of film. Kubrick’s work in The Shining feels ominous, whereas this is far more inviting. The sets are impossibly eye-popping, to the point that I had to rewind several times just to catch up with the dialogue. It’s very rare for me to see sets and styles that feel as fresh as these do. As far as storyline, it sticks with Wes’s goofy(and borderline hipster) vision, an inimitable approach that doesn’t feel like we’re going through the motions of conventional storytelling.
Wes seems intent on getting to the heart of a story, and I mean that literally - the beginning and end have a line drawn from the book reader, to the author, and their core inspiration. Anyway. The movie’s difficult to describe, but I love it greatly. I’m blissfully stumped.
One of AFI’s Top 100 looks pretty damn similar to Mrs. Doubtfire, and must‘ve been its key inspiration(though Some Like It Hot had to have been the point of origin for both). Some Like It Hot came with the gimmick of dressing up like the opposite sex, but they weren‘t quite experts at feminine prowess; It takes more than a wig and a wiggle to fool your viewership. Men masquerading as women has been going on since the Shakespearean days, so it’s apropos to find an actor
acting as an actor, acting as a southern middle-aged woman. His disposition transforms others as early as the first “rage audition” scene. He’s got the heart of a director. The potential is there in the heart of others, but requires facilitation or riling up to bring it out. The apprentice must learn from the master. Strange are the lengths he goes to pay the bills(you‘ll have to watch to find out), but stranger still is what he learns in the process.
I think this is where movies like Mrs. Doubtfire and Birdcage differ from Tootsie. The former two rely so heavily on the comedic tension of getting caught(or the comedic bits of getting dressed/playing the part) that there may not be space for much else. Tootsie’s especially clever due to playing off the nature of acting. By “getting in” to the character, such an intense empathy leads into seeing the world through their eyes, and learns a thing or two about life as a woman in the process. That personality can ebb and flow, particularly with the unfairer sex; His/Her ability to see the best in people and draw it out is balanced out with her fiery reprisals of salacious encounters, but can be counteracted by personalities drawing grace out of his personality
In terms of immersion for these types of movies, I kinda have to give my vote to Robin Williams. I Think Robin’s speaking role is more convincing as an elderly woman. “I do Voices”. Indeed, and I thought the levels of makeup worked better than Dustin‘s barebones approach. Both Mrs. Doubtfire and The Birdcage make for great laughs, but I do think the story holds up much better for Dustin’s Debut. There’s a message underlying here, and the movie’s found a sweet spot between humor and a bit of heart.
Ya still got it, toots.
It all started with a bang.
In the heart of the Bronx, Stanley had his childhood imprinted with the practice of photography. There’s no doubt a parallel to this with
Akira Kurosawa’s painting skills, both which fostered an understanding of art through image. I’d heard one philosopher describe a core definition of comedy to be “Making the dangerous feel safe, or the illogical seem logical”. It couldn’t be more apt for Dr. Strangelove. The screenplay written took a growing fear in the 1960’s, and viewed the story’s eccentricities in a very comedic light - a very particular brand of Black Comedy. But words written on a page aren’t enough to make a great movie. Show 10 directors the same script, and you’ll have 10 different visions of the same story. The excellent casting choice(Peter Sellers in particular) and hints of surrealistic lighting(The War Room always comes to mind for me) presents a movie that still holds up today. So how would this differ from the renowned Some Like it Hot, many years before? The satiric ruckus found itself dealing with Gangsters during the Prohibition and chaotic chases on a moving train, of all things. Neither movie comes off as the Three Stooges. Both can be comical, but you could argue Strangelove’s more grounded into reality.
At least for me, the underlying subject of Dr. Strangelove also plays a large part in its legacy. Some Like it Hot is funny as hell, but it’s still mostly an adventure of whimsy - a true sense of danger doesn‘t quite exist, even in the inevitable chase scenes. Even if you couldn’t care less about one of Peter Seller’s characters as President or Second-In-Command, the film’s black premise builds in a growing tension over time. This is especially true for those who watched it at launch; Strangelove was a product of its time, using mild exaggerations for both the obsessed Stanley and the viewers to deal with an unforeseen future. Kubrick made sure those exaggerations had an anchor into reality, which otherwise might have the story come off too absurd to take seriously. It certainly held a spirit of the times, perhaps like Casablanca was when released in the heart of World War II?
Might be why I enjoyed Election more. Most people reading this didn’t have a childhood that early, but nearly all’ve been to high school. We’ve seen the plastering of signs telling you to vote for this, that, and the other thing. Do most even know what the School Council will accomplish? Hell if I know, besides planning well-known party events and making for a nifty bit on your resume. There’s a poignant irony to Tracy Flick’s assuming that Elections aren’t a popularity contest, as she literally fuels it by print-pressing decorative “Vote Flick” coasters en masse. We know the image of a candidate, but only have vague impressions of the reality. A lot of the film’s lasting power builds through the characters; They might appear like stereotypes from every other school movie, but there’s depth here some are going to miss. It may seem analogous to Game of Thrones’ framework of flawed-but-intriguing characters, vying for their intermingled ideals of hegemonic status quo.
Or not. One candidate wants to see the system of school government blown to hell. Despite Broderick’s thought experiment on democratic principle, Tracy remained the best choice of the three…so the Vote to Hell was built on good intentions?
In either case, I
do think the deftness of the way characters interrelate and move forward the story speaks to sharp writing for a movie - one that’s been obscured by more popular High School movies with less thought and detail brought to the table. In both Strangelove and Election, We laugh at the comedy, cope through it, and reflect on it too. That’s smart Satire in my Book.
After rewatching Who Framed Roger Rabbit(Great Variety of Extras on the DVD, by the way), decided to check out Zemeckis’ earlier work with Romancing The Stone. I suppose this is what would happen if Alan Wake had more interest in cheesy romance novels and Uncharted. Though if we’re being honest, I’d happily take Douglas over Nathan Drake any day of the week. Nate’s a nice guy, but there’s a more interesting romance here - Michael’s more of the Han Solo rapscallion type and also brings out more of Joan Wilder’s, eh, Wild side. She comes off as the expectedly bookish type with aversion to real adventure, but by the end she’s really let her hair down. I loved the scene where they danced along the vibrant streets of Cartagena. It was the most erotic moment of my life. ~_~
You arrive at a table to meet two sisters, conjoined by the hip. One’s quite eager, but devoid of meaningful banter. The other’s a fanatic, but strangely compelling. To engage is out of the question, but one night would make the grade. Listen to one, Avoid the Other. Look for a card marked 30 or so - scanning the scenery is the simplest route.
I finished Roman Holiday, a clever film that has the roots of a fairy tale, but it’s told in a real-life setting. The premise will feel familiar to Disney’s Aladdin, but avoids what I always considered a misstep of that movie: Not spending enough time on your major characters. Disney Tangent. Aladdin felt like there was too little screen time between the two to build a real relationship, and too little points of worthwhile interest when they were. It was
very entertaining, but feels more akin to a roller coaster than anything else. Roman Holiday still has a princess and a pauper, but gives a better sense of the two characters and saves most of the plot-related stuff for the second half. It reminds me of something said at a meeting between Roger Ebert and an animation director:
It’s plenty for me, too.
One last thing. Decided to make a list of top film picks, organized by genre at 135 in total. Maybe you’ll find an unseen gem in there. Or something.
+ = A Light Recommendation. Not perfect, but probably worth looking into.
++ = A Good Recommendation, a strong example of eminent cinema.
+++ = A Great Recommendation. Finding a movie better than this would be quite rare.
= Dis Gon B Good
---------------------------------------------------------
Paintings In Motion:
Akira - ++
Bambi - ++
Beauty & The Beast - +++
End of Evangelion(Check The Series First) - +
Ghost in the Shell - +++
Grave of the Fireflies - ++
Lion King - +++
Millennium Actress - ++
Mulan - +
Paprika - ++
Perfect Blue - ++
Persepolis - ++
Prince of Egypt - ++
Princess Mononoke - ++
Song of the Sea - +
Spirited Away - +++
Tarzan - +
The Dark Knight Returns(Part 1 & 2) - +
The Iron Giant, The - +
The Last Unicorn - +
The Rescuers Down Under - +
The Secret of NIMH -
The Yellow Submarine - +
Triplets of Belleville, The - +
Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust - +
Some Light Humor:
Grand Budapest Hotel - ++
Groundhog Day - +
Harry & Tonto - +
Monty Python’s Holy Grail - ++
Hot Shots, Part Deux - +
Inside Out - ++
Kingsman: Secret Service - +
Men In Black 1 & 3 - +
Princess Bride, The - +
Rango - +
Roman Holiday - +
Tootsie - ++
Toy Story 1 - +++
Who Framed Roger Rabbit - +++
Zootopia - ++
Mellow Drama:
A Beautiful Mind - +
Amadeus - +
Batman Begins - +
Birdman - +
Blood Diamond - +
Cape Fear - +
Casablanca - ++
Chinatown - ++
Citizen Kane -
Fargo - +++
Full Metal Jacket - +
Godfather 1-2 - ++
Gone Girl - +
Good Will Hunting - +
Hamlet (Kenneth Branaugh) - ++
Hellboy II - +
Kung Fu Panda 2 - +
L.A. Confidential - +
Manchurian Candidate - +
Memento - ++
Nightcrawler - +
Pan's Labyrinth - +++
Pulp Fiction - ++
Rear Window - +
Red Dragon - +
Se7en - +
Shawshank Redemption - +
Silence of the Lambs - ++
Sling Blade - +
Sunset Boulevard - ++
There Will Be Blood - ++
The Danish Girl - +
The Dark Knight - ++
The Hunt for Red October - +
The Talented Mr. Ripley - ++
Touch of Evil - +
Vertigo - ++
Whiplash - +++
The Surrealist Mindfuck Category:
A Clockwork Orange - +
Altered States - +
American Psycho - ++
Big Lebowski - ++
Coraline - +
Donnie Darko - +
Enemy - +
Fight Club - ++
Jacob’s Ladder - ++
Mulholland Drive -
Paranorman - +
Requiem for a Dream - ++
Shining, The - ++
Signs In Fiction:
2001: A Space Odyssey - ++
Alien - ++
Aliens - +
Blade Runner - +++
Dark City - +
Ex Machina - +
Her - +
Inception - ++
Interstellar - +
Jurassic Park - +
Solaris - ++
The Matrix - ++
Total Recall - +
Truman Show - +
Some Not-So-Light Humor:
American Splendor - +
Catch-22 - +
Clerks - +
Election - ++
Dr. Strangelove - ++
Hot Fuzz - ++
Toy Story 3 - ++
Documentagory:
A Brony Tale - +
Citizenfour - +
Hitchcock/Trouffaut ++
Life Itself - ++
Action 52:
3:10 to Yuma - +
Batman/Batman Returns - +
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - +
Casino Royale - ++
Creed - +
Kill Bill ½ - ++
Jaws - +
Rambo: First Blood - +
Saving Private Ryan - +
Snowpiercer - ++
Spider Man 2 - +
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles(1991) - +
Terminator 2 - ++
The Avengers - +
Fantasy:
Frozen - +
Lord Of The Rings 1-3 - ++
Neverending Story, The - ++
Nightmare Before Christmas, The - ++
The Dark Crystal - +
Star Wars IV-VIII - ++
The Revenant Through both novel and film,
Revenant feels like a classic tale of Americana. Its premise works to both blur the lines of good and evil for the main characters, while building a bridge for a very daunting survivalist story. It’s been especially interesting to see how director Alejandro reinterprets a slightly more Matter-Of-Factly written piece of fiction into somewhere between The Night’s Watch from
ASoIaF, and….
The Tree of Life?! What the devil
Surprisingly enough, Early 19th Century Missouri turned out to be pretty upbeat. The dangers of man and animal, along with dwindling supplies(and chances of survival) work to develop the film’s haziness on the others’ “right” course of action should be. This is greatly enhanced by some top performances from both Tom Hardy and Leonardo, though for radically different reasons. Tom Hardy pulls off Fitzgerald exceptionally well through his speaking performance - I haven’t seen much of the man in film, but his accent and authenticity as a shadier huntsman is spot-on. Some new dialogue also make it a bit easier to empathize compared to the original Fitz.
Leo’s performance relies
greatly on the non-verbal, visual storytelling on what the book often told in a bit more detail. He’s definitely giving his all, and in “that one big scene”, I’m still baffled how he and “the other one” pulled it off in the first place. Was it practical? CG? Between modern tech-heads reaching levels of photorealism, it could run either way. There’s more than one scene in the film that cleverly merges the 2 mediums(if it is) without running into the same trap of the uncanny valley that many have fallen into. The valleys in
Revenant are breathtaking, though…and very much canny. Alejandro’s direction leans heavily towards long takes, I suspect to make Leo’s scenes all-the-more arduous. One scene early on seems to link between characters like it‘s
Birdman on steroids.
Much description in the novel plays not only on the exact how’s of his survival, but his past(and some surprising connections to american history). Many of the original characters’ roles and history are either less apparent or outright removed; This is partly substituted with a new character which not only drives Hugh closer toward his goal, but works as a way to highlight his past with the native tribes. I doubt the changes hinder the story. Instead, it channels the focus to the main 3 and its tone becomes slightly more contemplative than brutal - mostly due to the laundry list of environmental shots and some spoiler-y scenes. They’re also notable for adding new scenes with Fitz and another character, which enhance a central theme from
The Tree of Life: Nature Versus Grace.
The ending is better. It’s just better. Revenge often ends up to be an act of short-sighted futility, justified or not. Well…hey. Take it from me, sometimes ya gotta know when to QUIT. The original leaned more toward historical accuracy(as it’s based on once-living americans), and certainly pointed more toward the fruitless act - the problem is it feels ultimately unresolved for its characters. The new end, whether he succeeds or not, is a more appropriate ending for the story of our two hunters. All in all, it’s a strong adaptation and I was happy to see a new take on a tale as old as time. Much more of a survivalist story than that
Martian film. I mean, all the hard science in the world can't make it more than a feel-good geek fantasy COME O--
No Versus Threads. End of Line.
I saw
Predator. It ended up very similar to
Rambo II: The first half is a forgettable filler to setup a whole lot of blowing shit up. There’s not much point on talking about the first half, so let’s get to the second. The best of
Predator is inevitably when Arnold and The Predator go toe-to-toe, which sounds like something
Death Battle. It’s pretty entertaining, and the best lines end up during this tango in the process. The CG camouflage hasn’t aged well, but Masked Predator still is a badass alien dude, like something between Cybernetic Bob Marley and Casey Jones. The movie is an action-filled hamburger. Whether it’s a happy meal likely depends on your tastes. Also worth pointing out that the musical score feels like it was pulled straight out of
Back To The Future, that apprehensive music that plays when he’s trying to outrun someone. You know.
That.
I saw
Bridges on Madison County. A surprising success from Actor/Director Clint Eastwood. The film’s a romantic drama taking place in the remote section of Iowa, where an old photographer with a great talent meets a woman who’s anything but simple. An interesting spin on the movie’s structure gets thrown in right out the door; Said twist might come off as “the end is at the beginning” shtick early on, but helps point out a perceptive dissonance that may occur due to familiar ties. Your mom might just be “that person who packed your lunch and asked you to clean the room”, which can oversimplify things a bit; treat someone like a human outside their prevalent role, and you might just learn a thing or two about a thing or two. It’s a bit slow-paced, but the script is great enough that you may not notice at all. I also appreciated that the “fights” which inevitably show up aren’t just overblown drama, but can be based on the complex circumstances of their relationship and how they deal with that. Want to find the bridge between hearts? There’s certainly a door open in Madison County.
Many of the greatest stories are mysteries, as one many pleasures in film is not knowing what comes next.
Memento is a fantastic example, at the very least due to its unconventional narrative framework. While this is *technically* a rewatch, the true irony is I’d forgotten it all outside of the very first scene. The protagonist has a strange form of amnesia, more akin to a short-term memory disorder - after an incident involving a home invasion, he can’t remember anything beyond the 5-minute mark. He’s on a journey to find who killed his wife, despite his chronological dissonance. The ingenious design begins to show as the larger picture develops; The scenes are linear, but the order in which they’re presented are reversed, making the early scenes all but a brief impression. Context is key: Characters, Objects, and key facts can be perceived in drastically different ways after switching from one scene to the next. The film also throws in a few curveballs: Black & White scenes on the phone with enigmatic context(just like the rest of it?), and brief flashbacks towards “the incident” itself. The ending is pretty damn clever, and also gives motivation for a second viewing. You know, like Usual Suspects or whatever.
Checked out
A Bee Movie. Throw out the first two e’s, and you’re not far off. CG-Bee Seinfeld decides working yourself to death is probably a bad way to go, tries the more adventurous route, and gets spun into a super wacky escapade with an overdose of bee jokes. Most of the film is By-The-Numbers as far as the Family-Friendly-Voyage movies go. The few good parts come later in the movie in a court debacle, alluding to the way humans(in this case, beekeepers) can use, abuse, or outright kill creatures deemed unworthy to their society. I’ve personally murdered at least 30 times in my life, but they’ve all been of great contemptibility - Spiders, Flies, that sort of thing. And I would’ve gotten away with it too, if it weren’t for those meddling anthromorphs; Hat’s off to Western Animation for finding every possible animal, inanimate object, or other Lovable-Thing-That’s-Relatively-Non-Offensive and give it a human caricatured personality….which leads to the other problem.
If Bees were always relatable talking human-bee-things, why didn’t anyone figure that out *far* earlier in human history, before Seinbee and a Florist hit it off? Yes, Seinbee meets a cute florist and there’s a dreamy love scene that would make Sonic the Altered Beast roll over in his grave. Even if we’re throwing this into the “it’s similar to our world but they’re all talking bees”, *someone* should’ve figured out this glaring mystery somewhere along the countless centuries and yes I’m over thinking a crappy movie with funny celebrity voices BUT STILL. After the court scene, the writers decide that by stopping the beekeepers‘ industry, said bees get a huge surplus of honey, stop pollinating, and flowers globally wilt? Really? And that never happened *before* beekeepers existed?
HONESTLY WHAT IS THI-I experienced
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I honestly have a hard time writing about this - what plot there is to be had may just be in the heads of the two nutballs heading into las vegas with more questionable paraphernalia than a punch line I forgot to write up. Whoops. Plenty of trip-tastic visuals, dialogue that bounces wildly between vulgar and insightful, and some surprisingly good cinematography - one scene about 2/3 through plays off of the two main characters juxtaposed on two sides of the same room going through two disconnected emotional states: Euphoria, and Despair/Rage. Two sides of the same coin? This is a good movie if you’re looking for something that mixes a road trip and a drug frenzy, or just want to toss a WTF into your movie list.
Descent is best summed up in one word: Claustrophobic. The story’s *mostly* barebones, the characters aren’t much out of the ordinary, but the film *does* succeed in playing off the setting to create a level of tension and terror through means that(at least for the first half of the film) doesn’t involve spooky monsters or psychological symbolism. When we think claustrophobia, perhaps we think of an enclosed hallway or the like. Underground rock formations with barely enough room to fit in a human body? Yep, they’re in here. Playing off lighting and shadows as well, the sense of seclusion in Descent from the outside world is palpable. If you’re going to watch Descent, watch it for that. Once the monster below makes its appearance, the survivalists expectedly split off and become the crawling dead.; The ending has an ambiguous ‘full circle’ effect that adds a bit more to the movie than most conventional horror films.
Blood Diamond is as brilliant as its namesake. Sierra Leone is covered in political turmoil - a government that can barely defend its people, rebel factions that could hardly govern outside of throwing child soldiers in the way for its revolting ideas of peace, and a grab bag of foreign parties with varying agendas. This Is Africa. Tied into the heart of this conflict is humanity’s neverending search for wealth and goods - in this case, the Diamond. Won’t find a story like this in a Zales commercial, I know that much. Our deuteragonists come from very different sides of the story, one getting some great character development while the other easily has the most emotionally gripping tales’ of the two. Great script, great acting, it’s a rare treat for those who want a serious story with a unique historical/political backdrop.
Hot Fuzz Is like riding a one-way bullet train to hell while listening to some odd, exceptionally british conversations on the way there. Ever felt like the odd one out, a special snowflake in a Snow Castle tinged with a questionable yellow? Starring Mr. Angel, Hot Fuzz succeeds through a Dark & Clever Semi-Absurdist script, a use of high-energy quick-cuts that pulled straight out of Requiem of a Dream, it has a stronger story and better pacing than its predecessor, Shaun of the Dead. Not much else to add, it’s just damned good.
A Million Ways to Die in the West is possibly the worst movie I’ve seen all year. Some films I simply get bored with if they‘re not up to snuff, but this was actually *painful* and cringe worthy to watch. While the movie has the celebrity head count and the visual quality on its side, the Anachronistic juxtaposition between the setting and the actor’s performances hinder much of the film’s potential quality to a screeching halt. It’s not Epic Movie bad, but it’s a big dissapointment.
What you ultimately get is a film that neither tells a joke or tells a story that justifies the admission price or the time spent. I’d happily toss out the issue with the wibbly-wobbly time stuff if the script had the humor to make said jokeathon work, or if a DeLorean transported seth back in time from modern day to 1885. Of the 2 hours, I can count *maybe* 3 or 4 jokes that actually worked. The photo joke, the bad Gunshot gag, and a couple others. The Outtakes got more laughs out of me than the *actual* movie. S’bad. If you want a great comedy, probably better trying somewhere else.
Jackie Brown is a funky-ass film. It’s been a while since I’ve seen a movie with such a strong 70’s vibe to it, and Quent certainly got it right on that end. Story-Wise initially leans towards the less savory forms of High-Profit Business, but starts opening up a larger end of intrigue, especially for the title character herself. Starting off as a Low-Paid Flight Attendant, how and who she interacts with can shape and mold your perception of Jackie to the point that where the movie will end is too hard to tell. It’s almost like watching Jackie Brown play Fallout: New Vegas. XD Tarantino does some really clever stuff involving a long take, and shots where the actor’s voices play take over the audience’s focus. The way the last 30 minutes plays out also throw some curveballs at the audience involving multiple points of view. It’s a pretty great watch.
Inside Out. Of the modern disney movies I’ve seen, this is impressive due at least to the fact that it’s not just a whimsical ride with a throwaway villain that leads to a happily ever after - Inside Out actually has something to say that resonates beyond “Love heals all, especially at convenient plot moments since legends foretold lololol“. Beyond the familiar realms of Modernized Fairy Tales and Wacky Adventures, Inside Out juxtaposes 2 separate realities in & out of the mind with strong finesse. Said formula starts out as an Osmosis Jones-esque story that turns into a neat analysis on how we deal with our own emotions(or at least one of them), the inevitability of change, and perhaps that noble intentions won’t always make things right.
Visuals are on par with Disney. “Outside” characters and environments are about the same as Big Hero 6. “Inside” varies a bit. Joy and Sadness get some really great particle effects on their skin at close-range, and the hair literally looks sharp as a razor. Character-Wise, they’re fairly simplistic caricatures of our neurological sensations - the Control Freak with an upbeat attitude, the emo, the Lewis Black Super-Meat-Boy amalgamate, the panicky nerd, and some sort of preppy-clique green girl thing. Unfortunately the last 3 personalities don’t go much farther than that, getting shoehorned into the comic-relief department. Not that they do that horribly. Lewis Black is Lewis Black, so laughs will be involved.
The Real Meat & Potatoes come with Joy & Sadness, these two getting more focus and a bit more depth put into their characters. Their relationship also develops gradually over time during the film, which plays off very well for the ending. Despite me getting spoiled on the ending akin to “Sadness killed Dumbledore“, it’s still a meaningful message and relevant in current society. Do people want to Escape Reality, or block those parts of reality which aren‘t so convenient? It’s not necessarily a message about sadness itself; To me, it’s about acceptance of the elements around you, dealing with inconvenient truths, and learning from troubles of the past or present.
Gripes… said analysis seems one-sided on dealing with Joy/Sadness, and doesn’t pay much or any attention to the other 3. Kinda sucks, since there’s plenty of potential for something deeper than “this is the part where she gets angry/scared/disgusted”. Also:
Sadness becomes possessed to touch the memory orb early on, cause plot? Joy decides the martyrdom of 100 Imaginary boyfriends is worth a 10 year old she‘ll never meet? Lol genocide. Why not, I don‘t know, use the clouds from cloud city? Involves a bit less death.
I saw
Mulholland Drive. A movie that builds tension through quasi-surrealistic lighting, camera work(extreme close-up much?), nonlinear storytelling, and clever editing, all while juggling multiple character perspectives that intertwine a la Magnolia/Pulp Fiction/Etc. There are very few pieces of media that can bring a true sense of trepidation. For better or for worse, Mulholland did a number on me. Not initially, but it hit *hard*. Outside of that, you’re better off going in as a blank slate to get the full effect. Pretty damn impressive, and a hell of a lot more interesting than the average film.
I‘m curious if this movie inspired the original novel of “The Double“, which later was adapted as Enemy, starring Jake Gyllenhaal. One main difference between the two is it‘s less obvious in Mulholland whether Betty/Diane’s role is as pivotal as it turns out to be, due to the larger character roster at play. There’s a sense of isolationism that you get both in Enemy or my recent time with Babadook that isn’t *as* prevalent in Mulholland. At least not consistently. My opinion isn‘t far from most critics on it being an Idealization Dream meeting the Crush of Reality with a heap of parallels and symbolisms. One thing I noticed, albeit very small. Right after reality sets in and the “Cowboy” tells her to wake up, it fades to black only to switch the wall’s color to a dark blue. Damn, that’s creepy. Silencio seems like it may be a commentary on the illusion of film-making, but not sure how it's connected to the overarching story.
I checked out
Rambo III. Actually, I liked it a bit better than Part Deux, aka killeveryonewithagunmovie. It’s more of a rescue mission with the action spaced out a bit more. Very cool intro, reminds me of something out of
Bloodsport and Stallone is seriously ripped. The story doesn’t go much farther than bad guys are bad so you gotta save the day so not much to add there; It’s more like a new setting for the previous movie’s formula, albeit populated with civilian afghani characters who add a more human element compared to its predecessor. This round, he employs stealth. With Rambo Part II, he spent too much time running around in open spaces. Action alone is not enough;
Timing is the key. It makes the ending scene that much more enjoyable, since the audience is less desensitized to the manifestation of enmity from Rambo’s Armaments. Which is a fancy way of saying he shoots fewer people in the face. Afraid the first is the only one I enjoyed from front to back - and with that, I’m Rambo’ed out.
-----
Appropriately Last, and definitely not least, I finished watching
A Tolkien-Esque Fantasy Adventure Animated Flick with the talents of the late Christopher Lee, Jeff Bridges, Mia Farrow, and Angela Lansbury. Visually it looks very good for its time - backgrounds hold the impressionistic stylings of forestry you’d see from Bambi or its similar ilk. Character models are a strange mishmash; some look similar to the hobbits/humans from the Animated LOTR movies, while others have a more Japanese influence. My one gripe is that for budgetary reasons, they sometimes “double-up” frames, meaning the dialogue isn’t going to be frame-by-frame perfect. Overall though, I was very happy with the results.
As you’d notice from earlier, VA casting is fantastic. Outside of a singing part which might make Simon Cowell wince a bit, it couldn’t have worked out better. Christopher Lee’s booming vocals do indeed make an impression, and Mia carries the gentle-yet-poised personality very well. As for the story itself, it’s a poetic tale of Dark fantasy that touches on a nigh-extinct creature seeking to find more of her kind. The movie explores villains that are anything but one-sided, a case of identity crisis, and does so with some pretty sharp writing. It’s also one of the earliest cases in animation of “meta fiction“, wherein the characters are vaguely aware they’re in a fairy tale. Structurally, it feels like a LOTR spot-to-spot adventure until reaching a certain spoiler-ish point. Some of the plot points are bending logic a bit, but not enough to bring out the torches. At the very least, the film is a breath of fresh air in an era where the West’s average idea of a great animated movie is Hyperinflating their characters and world with visual gags & contrived humor to the point where the stories are hardly even stories, and the last dewdrops of sincerity from said characters are all but evaporated.
Run-On sentence lol.
It’s funny, because I’d rented the movie as an Eh-What-The-Hell choice, and it turned out to be one of my favorites. It comes along with a 45-minute behind the scenes with the Author/Screenwriter Peter S. Beagle(who seems like a Cool Dude), and a nifty commentary. This movie rekindled my love for animation. Tasteful, Eloquent, and occasionally Frightening, it’s a surprise gem.
Finished
Sling Blade, one of the best I’ve seen this year. Stellar script, great acting, all around an remarkable movie with a deceptively simple protagonist. Karl as a character, both where he starts out and how people react to him, pose innumerable questions for the audience to think on. Simple ways aren’t a sin, and it seems like half the time he has more common sense than the “normal” folk he’s surrounded by. In a way, his “freedom” is more like living through the reverberations and echoes of his past life. Time flows like a river, and history repeats. While the end may not surprise everyone, the way they execute it is precisely what was needed to finish the story right.
Billy Bob Thorton is *also* the Director.
Kenneth Branaugh much? It’s astonishing how he manages to transform himself through acting to such a point that him, and the man who was riding the red tide many years after are worlds apart. It’s a testament to the man’s acting, and the cast besides him hold up very well in believability. The way he frames the film reminds me a bit of citizen kane where he can have an angular focus on the main characters - particularly with him and frank. They also do stuff that reminds me a teensy bit of pulp fiction; They’ll have a fairly long cut with both characters in frame, then switch to alternating shots when complications arise. Overall, it was a pleasant surprise and I came away impressed.
I Saw
Birdman. At least in terms of Cinematography, it’s unique for creating a true sense of immersion through the illusion of “the one take”. Many modern films involve a myriad of cursory takes pieced together; As Birdman takes place in a smaller setting and sticks with a single protagonist, the director chose a path Orson Welles would’ve been proud of. The camera moves through hallways, around actors, and everything else in between without a true cut - they seem to use camera swivels or dark hallways to transition from one Uber-Take to the next. The tone of the movie is dark and realistic, and the actors‘ performances sell it very well. Of the modern films to be released, I’d recommend it if you’re curious to see something a bit more eccentric and bold.
O Brother, Where Art Thou…. would be more aptly named as
Three Stooges Unchained. I can’t help but scratch my head at the Coen Brothers’ film. Free from the shackles of fate, they…go wandering, and stuff, and weird stuff happens. The script is certainly verbose to a degree, but the performances tend to veer between the cartoony and just-plain-ludicrous. Visually it’s a well-shot movie and there’s a strong level of entertainment value…maybe it’s a case like Tree of Life where my perception wasn’t in line with those who created it. If you wanted
Django Unchained with an extra level of gonzo, I guess this is your movie? Maybe if you’re feeling lucky.
Fucknuts, I Saw A Shit Ton of Disney Movies. Lightning Round:
Rewatched
Bambi. While Snow White And The Seven Dwarves had managed to prove animated films were possible in the first place, Bambi was the first to pull off animated films as a form of art. Part of this was on a visual basis. Using techniques like the multi-plane shots, disney could create a sense of depth by filming several background pieces and moving them one frame at a time to create the illusion of depth. This technique would go on for literal decades after Bambi was released. It has a naturalism in terms of its animal characters that hardly exists in an era where countless African species look at the camera to tell you how much they like to
move it move it. Anyways, the storyline is fairly simplistic but manages well through its impeccable music and extreme visual detail, especially for its time. it’s a coming of age story brought into a form that’s both timeless and universal.
Saw
Pocahontas too. One of the best-looking 2D disney movies to date. It’s also one of the few animated disney movies that held a more serious tone and diverged from a forced happy ending. There’s also a level of spirituality in Pocahontas that’s unique to the disney library, in both special effects and thematically. S’good, go see it.
I checked out
Planes: Fire&Rescue. Nope.
Last, but definitely not least, I saw
The Princess And The Frog. What I expected from the film and what it was were nearly at opposites. Unlike most disney princesses, the main character isn’t a la-di-da girl yearning to get a sense of adventure by either investing in experimental lower-torso surgery or testing the limits of Stockholm syndrome. She’s an overworked woman aiming for an american dream…but is it her own? I can’t get too deep into the story, as a fairly major twist rests heavily on it. I can say though that they do an apt job of playing with the theme of misplaced desire. For some, Money and Happiness are the same thing - perhaps it can buy
opportunity to happiness outside of the bare necessities, but the two main elements are hardly interchangeable. The Right Path, and the Easy Path are not always the same.
Visually it reminds me of some of the older films like
Lady and the Tramp mixed with some newer treats that border on mindfuck. Overly-Attached Musical Crocodile…
Lol don bluth? At the very least, it’s worth seeing what may be the last Two-Dimensional Disney film. I, for one, welcome our computer-generated overlords. not
Age of Ultron…not really much to say on this one. Take Avengers and toss in a rampant AI with an awkward sense of humor and a Lawnmower-Man complex. It seems Joss aimed to humanize him, but it came off ungainly to me. I liked the characterization for Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver, though. They definitely kept it fresh with the action sequences which seem a lot more memorable than those in the original avengers film. It’s worth a look, but I wouldn’t put expectations up to 11.
Enjoyed
Total Recall. Inspired by a short story from Phillip K. Dick and acted out by Arnold Schwarzenegger, it sounds like the ultimate Thinking Man’s Action Movie. And at least to an extent, it kinda is. While something like Blade Runner is a bit heavier on the drama side, Total Recall(at least after the first 15 minutes) becomes very heavy on action, all the while juggling the tension through Philosophical Mind Games and general crazy 80’s-Sci-Fi-Shtick. They say Memory makes the man(or at least Bourne would), and they do a great job of playing off that in character interactions and a very clever twist roughly halfway in the movie. In terms of Acting,
Ahhhhnold is Ahnold. He gets some pretty clever lines, but I’m not exactly taking it that seriously. The same could be said for a large portion of the movie, which can be as clichéd as the premise that could *potentially* exist. Do I recommend it? Yeah, it’ll make you think, make you laugh, and make you wonder how they pulled off some of those visual treats. As long as you don’t mind a bit of cheeseball, you’ll have a ball.
I Saw
Zootopia.
Short Answer: It’s an amazing movie virtually anyone can enjoy, adults in particular. Go ahead and give it a look.
Long Answer: Zootopia finds itself as a grand success due to Handling themes more relevant to Modern-Day events, and how that’s tied into the character’s personality traits is a very pleasant surprise. It’s also funny as hell.
TLDR Nonsense: Disney movies have grown a signature style over the years, involving stories and characters which are universally understood - not unlike most comic book movies(or the now Disney-Owned Star Wars franchise). While this philosophy has gone to produce many classics of fairy tales and its ilk, Disney & its CG counterpart Pixar eventually branched out into stories that felt more modern in comparison. In years past, Toy Story made waves for its impressive duality of both comedic wit, and carrying mature subtext to its narrative.
And now on the tail end of releasing Pixar’s psychological wunderkind
Inside Out arrives
Zootopia, which carries a spiritual succession to many of those traits. It’s a visually striking movie, combining the familiar feel of New York with a more varied set of environmental backdrops as the story progresses.
Concordantly, the audio implements both classical orchestrations, and more international instrumentation to work alongside the Zoological Melting Pot. One notable change is a more organic use of Licensed music, avoiding a previous faux pas which made an appearance in their work with
Wreck-It-Ralph. Disney’s CG Art style’s has always danced between realism and the cartoonish - it seems to work seamlessly with character designs that inevitably find themselves at a 50-50 split.
At first glance, this looks like a movie full of adorable anthropomorphic animals running about. On a very basic level, this is true. What makes the film astounding though is how they bring weight to its story and characters - not through a one-note villain or a cheesy ending, but through something far more subtle. It succeeds at tackling our own ideologies in a meaningful, if somewhat alarming way. So, let’s talk about bunnies for a second.
Ms. Judy Hopps lives in a small rural town, practically glowing with noble aspirations: The brave little bunny wants to join the police force and visit the big city. Big dreams, but her parents are notably worried; This kind of work seems more suited for someone larger-sized, and it starts the tale off strong enough as an Underdog story. Or Underbunny. Whatever. While this is played off fairly straightforward, the storytellers are planting seeds; These grow to startling heights long before hitting the 2-hour mark.
Of course, this is a comedy too.
Zootopia has some of the sharpest comedic dialogue I’ve seen in a while. Disney Animation’s managed to find a robust balance of smart satire, a focused use of visual entertainment, and their trademarked self-referential humor; Might want to keep the pause button handy for quite a few of the Disney easter eggs planted around the film. One of the best scenes in the movie at the halfway point won’t be one I’ll forget anytime soon, playing off of the expectations of CG’d Animal movies with hilarious results.
What’s surprising though is that they can handle this comedy while still building depth to its characters - occasionally at the same time. On the surface, Judy Hopps is a joyful idealist with a go-to attitude. She eventually joins up with Nick Wilde, who leans more towards sly street-smarts and a level of pragmatism to how the world works from his point of view. They’re easy to relate to, and there’s certainly an odd-couple effect to the relationship. What’s pushing
Zootopia farther with these characters though is how their previous experiences affect not only how they percieve their world, but each other based on their own traits. Even comedic lines early on can take on a different context over time, and it makes for an impressive feat from Disney Animation.
The tough subject matter they’re tackling *has* been done before, but not with the same weight to its story. An Example: Dr. Seuss’s “Sneetches” was known for capturing this topic, but it leans more toward a conceptual fantasy akin to a think-piece. We get the moral, but learn it from a viable distance. In
Zootopia, the real-world parallels(both in setting and scenario) hit closer to home. They’re fairly subdued early on with this subject; The “Ice Cream” scene points out the dilemma without feeling the need of shouting it to the audience or going into a musical number about it, eventually bringing things into greater focus. Many Disney films have a timeless quality to their settings and storytelling, but
Zootopia’s contemporary take on enduring parts of the human condition make it stand out not just through their own work, but Western Animated Film in general.
While operating as a character-focused comedy, it has slices of mystery which organically juggle its own overarching theme, adding a spin to the movie that hammers in the disquieting lengths people(or animal people?) will go to achieve their own sense of balance and hegemony. If there’s one complaint I’d mention, it’s that Ms. Hopps’ parents earliest conversation on “complacency” is stretching the characters a bit; It feels similarly unnecessary akin to the ongoing banter in
Frozen, as they try reversing their “Love at First Sight” trope multiple times while dashing through the snow. Once is enough, let it go already.
Outside of that, this is an easy reccomendation. I’d heard nothing but praise for this movie long before checking it out; One movie later, I see exactly why. Simultaneously entertaining and thought-provoking, virtually anyone can find something to enjoy in
Zootopia.
--------------------
I saw a couple.
There Will Be Blood.
And Black Gold, apparently. For those looking for a western setting beyond classic gun slinging formulae, it’s easy to recommend checking out the movie. Similar to
Red Dead Redemption, TWBB seems to lie in between the Industrial Revolution and the Wild West days, targeting a man with a sovereign mindset and lofty goals in his agenda.
The actor, Daniel-Day Lewis, is a godsend. It makes the movie. For most films, the illusion that someone *isn’t* acting is typically shot down either by lesser performances, or just being aware of the actor as a celebrity beforehand - that sort of thing makes this artifice harder to take. I’d actually mistook him for being Jon Hamm with a mustachio in the first 10 minutes. I swear, that guy is everywhere.
Daniel himself has the same talent of enveloping a character as Mr. Thorton did in
Sling Blade. There’s one big difference, though - Emotional Range. Part of Billy-Bob’s charm in
Sling Blade was his lack of concern and acceptance in very extreme situations. Our protagonist Daniel Plainview couldn’t be farther away - the narrative occasionally pushes him into points that would make any man’s psyche eschew the laws of logic and sanity. His performance, like a VSN thread page, is refreshing. The final scene for the movie stamps in the fanaticisms for two of its characters perfectly, and the scene’s handling vaguely reminded me of the last 20 minutes for
Blade Runner - a bit less running around for the two in TWBB, though.
As far as the rest of the film, it has a strong cast of characters to place against the bombastic cult of personality to display the grandiose ethical contrasts between Dniel and everyone else. Camera work is a treat; I noticed in several of the early scenes, the director uses longer shots with fairly low audio, only to unceremoniously throw a bull in the china shop during the finale of the same scene. It’s hammered in a bit by one of the speech scenes with an extreme close-up and a long take; The audience could be 5 or 500 for all you know, so we‘re more sensitive once the rug is pulled. His use of musical score is sparse, but effective - a key scene about halfway through feels surprisingly mechanical(though it fit’s the scene in question). My only minor quibble to the movie is one of the later scenes looks like the visual fidelity took a hit. Otherwise,
There Will Be Blood is great.
I’d also recommend
Roger Ebert‘s Review, which goes a great deal further into Plainview’s borderline-counterfeit personality.
I saw
Deadpool. It was the cinematic equivalent of reading the Sunday Funnies - I grinned every once in a while, but 2 hours is asking a bit too much.
Deadpool involves an Origin Story and a Love Story; That covers the story section of my impressions. The improvised scenes seemed to be the funnier shtick, and I seemed to enjoy the bonus features more than the film itself. 1 hour and 20 minutes of behind the scenes, Audio commentary, and of course Deadpool’s Personal Favorite: The Gag Reel. I’ll admit that the costume is one of my favorites for live-action Superhero wardrobe, it’s exactly what Deadpool fans will be looking for. The man spent $10,000 to license a Bea Arthur T-shirt, so Reynolds certainly has a fondness for playing dress-up. If you’re looking for crude humor with a few narrative bumps that lightly play with chronology, it might be your cup of chimicha-tea. Otherwise, might wanna skip getting your drink on.
Less Angry Rosie O’ Donnell? lol
Creed is gloriously good; It’s a great example of how to handle a reboot. Passing the torch with a character like this comes with a ton of clever angles to approach his relationships with others and make his rise anything but one-note.
Gone With The Wind is what happens when you combine a Jane Austen novel with
Final Fantasy IV. I mean the latter only with how they’ve structured the narrative: Two acts which seem diametrically opposed, and too spoilery to get into great detail. It’s interesting to see the events portrayed from that particular side(a very hoity-toity side), which makes how they handle its effects that much more potent. Rhett Butler’s such a charmer.
The Big Short has Bubble-Bath Exposition, 4th Wall Breaking, Christian Bale Drum Fills, and a compelling look into one of the biggest Crises in US history. There’s a lot of economically-heavy dialogue, though they break the ice for this in a very clever and entertaining way.
The Martian. Finally tossed aside my curmudgeonly disdain for the novel, and watched it. The movie’s a far more satisfying trip by resolving two major caveats towards the book: A problematically-written character, and a level of required-reading hard science that’s simply going to go past the heads of most booklover. In
Revenant, they chose a “Show, Don’t Tell” approach towards survival tactics.
Martian pulls off both at the same time, keeping the facts from the logs intact but doesn’t come off as a literal text wall. Film’s a visual medium, so there ya go. As for characterization, the book’s version feels upbeat to the point that it comes off more like a caricature - a self-insert for describing Mr. Weir’s scenario. To be fair, the scenario is surprisingly thought out and I‘m glad the movie turned out as it did. Damon’s performance remedies this problem - he’s a goofy guy in an insane situation, but the humor feels less like a contrivance for the sake of comedic relief. So yes, this is a great film. Probably the part where I apologize to Odan for tearing the book a new one on multiple occasions.
Gone Girl was pretty spot-on - David Fincher directing a screenplay based on Gillian Flynn’s word is a perfect match. Ben Affleck, regardless of film, is still a solid actor. His other half hasn’t the celebrity status, but definitely holds the same bar of acting ability. Was surprised that Neil Patrick Harris was cast for that particular role, but he pulled it off well. Held the same surprise with Mr. Timberlake in
The Social Network. My opinion is otherwise the same as with the book, they hold the same essence and vibe to it. Great movie that switches between mystery and thriller with ingenious, borderline devilish finesse. Gillian pls
The Dark Crystal has to be one of the most visually ambitious films I’ve seen. It shares Ghibli’s inventiveness in both character and world designs, which is inspired by the illustrative work of Brian Froud. Sort of like a half-point between
Where the Wild Things Are and the fantastical side of
Pan’s Labyrinth. Descriptions beyond that aren’t going to do much, though the behind-the-scenes(which goes on for nearly an hour) explains a “generational” take on creating and evolving the unique beings and beasts roaming about. The gelflings are the only ones I was disappointed in - though they’re the most human, they can also come off as the most puppet-y. On the whole, it’s still spellbinding to see this sort of movie as it’s becoming(or already is?) a lost art.
Even by the standards of the Nihilistic Metafictional Classic
The Neverending Story, this is expectedly a very dark movie - perhaps only outdone by
Wizard of Oz II: Beheaded Boogaloo. I can think of 2 particular scenes which use character enervation with disturbing results. The plot comes with a neat idea of shattered realities - the starting narration is fairly vague on the subject, but the scenarios are surprisingly strong at world-building, even using a trope from Witcher 3(and assumably somewhere in the books). Like
The Last Unicorn, it spends a large portion of time as a Quest for its own kind, jumping around in a LOTR-esque landscape, though
Dark Crystal comes with a feathery B-Story. Watching Henson and Oz’s
The Dark Crystal is impressive due to the boggling extents they went to flesh out a world that inspired, even if the story doesn't quite reach the same level. Fun Fact: Brian Froud later had a son named Toby. Maybe you can figure out the rest?
Krampus’s cover looks like one of those cheapy Christmas-Horror movies I see in rental stores. Fortunately, it’s far better than any of that. The first 10 minutes came as a surprise, witnessing a parodic, heavily cynical take on the Glorified Commercially Appealing aspects of Christmas, and its squalid reality. Forced family time with people you’ve nothing in common with, a sense of obligation for commercialism which is valued over, I don’t know, something with meaning? This notion is tied directly into the film’s villain, who couldn’t be rooted any deeper in the *actual* history of Christmas. Characters themselves are a sort of sick take on the
Home Alone family before they take off. As much as I’ve liked things in this paragraph so far, how it plays out is fairly formulaic - the only side benefit to this is the way Krampus’ little helpers approach the family is fairly inventive, and very grotesque. It’s hardly perfect, but I tip my tap to their somewhat disparaging theme on how people perceive, and “celebrate” holidays.
The Godfather Part II, Clint Eastwood‘s
Absolute Power,
Harry & Tonto,
The Witch,
Ip Man 3,
Lincoln,
Purple Rain,
A Cartridge, and
A Bear‘s Tree.
And now, for something completely different.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two Is Still Canon(and Happy?)HumanityNumber OneThe Bastards with Emotional MoneyWhat in the WorldNeophyteTricks of the TradeEdit:Inspiration, ManifestMovies of Manliness
My first time seeing it,
Macbeth is mayhaps the manliest adaptation of Shakespearean plays. Witches of Fate, An Assassin of Kings? Instead of Hamlet’s eloquent expose on betrayal from the victim’s point of view, Macbeth prefers flipping it the other way around. A bit like
Revenant, it seems more focused on 2-3 key characters with the rest more as part of the backdrop. The director presented the character’s motive as a bit more complex than ambition or greed; The behind-the-scenes in particular pointed out something on Macbeth’s character that was apparently long ahead of its time before a popularized phrase cemented it centuries later. Very good watch, the classic remains a classic.
At a younger age, Spielberg used to make short war films which were partly inspired by his father's war stories. And now decades later, we reach the script of
Saving Private Ryan. The themes cover the bizarre substantiation for its premise, and how that overarches into the rationale for the role and goal of soldiers as a whole. Anyone who’s played
ME2’s Suicide Mission can get empathize with Tom Hank’s growing pains with impossible choices as commander. It doesn’t get more all-star in casting than this, and I’m surprised by some of the oddball choices: Vin Diesel, Paul Giamatti, Nathan Fillion? Even fargone picks like Ted Danson are surprisingly suitable to their roles. In terms of realism, Spielberg did for WWII movies what Oliver Stone did for Vietnam War films. One hell of a movie.
Casino Royale was the first redux for the Bond Franchise, and it’s notable how different it was from the originals, especially with
Spectre being more of a return to form. Pretty darn good.
Dark & Thrilling
Cape Fear is a thriller whose script and cinematography seems like a hybrid between classic Hitchcock films, and Stephen King(without the Supernatural Hubuzewha). Scorcese seems very privy to those camera zoom-ins to a close-up; He also does memorable framing between the 2 main characters where the left side is the dominant character, but does the reverse about halfway through. As for the “other” character, I haven’t been this terrified of a De Niro role since
Taxi Driver - he’s honed an unnerving balance of between the charismatic and menacing nature of psychopathy.
The Talented Mr. Ripley will feel right at home with fans of
Dexter. It’s one of my new favorite movies. It also reminded me that Gweneth Paltrow and Cate Blanchett are the two most elegant blondes in Cinema. Hubba Hubba.
Carol is directed by the man who worked on
Mildred Pierce, and its penned from Patricia Highsmith - the same author as
The Talented Mr. Ripley. Instead of focusing on the criminal mind(at least from a conventional POV), it’s more about an amorous relationship with strong complexity. It’s technically an F/F narrative, but that in itself plays little toward the narrative intrigue itself. The 2 movies are stimulating, in a Moody Period-Era sort of way.
The Laugh Track
The Birdcage is like watching a psychotic horse run into a burning stable. Their barn doors definitely swing that way, if the first 5 minutes are any indication. The crux of the movie is as ancient as
Romeo & Juliet, but tragedy is a minor undertone at best; Robin Williams, Nathan Lane, and Hank Azaria playing off each other in a film like this is comedic gold. Very funny. J
I saw a few comedian DVDs. Lewis Black’s
Stark Raving Black is the best of his I’ve seen, and pretty much all of George Carlin’s stuff is gold. Not sure how I feel about Jim Gaffigan’s
Obsessed. Reminds me of an old friend my sister and I knew in High School who had that kind of silly & weird humor. He’s pretty good.
Men In Black III is as funny as the original, and a surprisingly smart conclusion to the film and the series. Love the Time Jump Scene, and especially that part where the alien chick licks willy with a giant to-
Also:
Go Directly To JailA Game of LimboBack In BlackSessam Eht NiojGorilla TacticsCircular Hybrid[/u]