#i mean have you seen colin farrell's hands??!

[coulsons-fullmetal-cellist]

Dieter and The Lobster

(Dieter x horror loving female)

Words: 2, 152

Summary: a flashback to the set of Sap of Justice where you have a few interesting questions for Dieter

Warnings: lots of adorable mutual pining, men being creepy, mild swearing, Dieter being downright adorable

Check out masterlist here

“Can I ask you a random question Mr. Bravo?”

“I’ve been asked so many questions by so many random people there’s a slim chance there’s a question I haven’t been asked.”

Being stuck in the makeup trailer together for many hours on the set of Sap of Justice brought out the curiosity in each other. Dieter had a bored look on his face, and over the weeks working together, you felt it was safe enough to ask him a harmless question.

“Has anyone ever asked what sort of animal you’d like to be?”

“No, no ones ever asked me that question.”

“Well, what sort of animal would you like to be?”

“Oh, I think I’d like to be a chicken. The female one, not the male one.”

“A hen not a rooster?”

“Yeah, you ever seen Chicken Run?” you nodded, “Great film. I’d never like to be in their situation, but it seems nice to just eat food, lay eggs, hang out in a nice warm hen house. And if I was a Muppet chicken, I’d get to hang out with Gonzo,” you couldn’t help but laugh at that, “What about you?”

“Me? A real animal or Muppet?”

He shrugged, “Both.”

“Have you seen the film The Lobster?” Dieter shook his head, “It’s a bit of a weird film but Colin Farrell’s character makes a great point about lobsters: they live for over one hundred years, and I could pinch people. But I don’t think I’d like to be a real lobster as I’ll most likely get boiled as soon as possible so I’d go for a Muppet one. Are there any Muppet lobster?”

“Oh yeah, Muppets Treasure Island has Polly the lobster.”

“Oh yeah,” your smile brought out a small one in Dieter.

“What about a real animal?” he asked.

“Well,” you paused for dramatic effect, “Have you ever heard of a Mantis Shrimp?” he shook his head, “It’s this tiny little shrimp that has the most powerful punch of any creature. Its punch can boil the water around,” he whistled in admiration, “I know, a tiny thing can pack quite a punch, it’s what I aspire to be.”

“So, it’s a bit like Hermia,” you gave a quizzical look, “From A Midsummer Nights Dream; and though she be but little, she is fierce.”

“Oh, I like that,” you put down your brushes, “All done Mr. Bravo. Good luck with today’s filming.”

*****

“Hurry up, shut the door.” Adrién absolutely detested bugs of all kinds so the idea of sitting out in the wild for a shoot was a downright insufferable kind of torture. They could barely stand the drive up into the forest to collect Dieter.

“The bugs aren’t going to get in,” but he shut the door anyways. “Hey, you know those soft toy plush things?”

“You mean plushies?”

“Yeah, can you get them lobster shaped?”

“Are you wanting a lobster plushie?”

Dieter nodded, “Not life-sized though,” he gestured with his hands, “About this big.”

“Any reason why?” They received a lot of weird requests from the star in their life of working with him, but this one was unusual but sweetly innocent.

“I just want one is all.”

*****

“Could I ask you another random question Mr. Bravo?”

“Sure, I like random questions.”

“Has anyone ever asked you the deserted island question?” he looked confused so you continued, “If you were stuck on a deserted island, what three things would you want with you?”

“No one’s ever asked me that,” he seemed disappointed by the lack of interesting questions being asked his way, “I honestly have no idea, I need time to think about it. What would you bring?”

“I’ve had lots of time to think about it, so I know what I’d bring: a Swiss Army knife, a water filtration system and an endless supply of duct tape.”

“And there would be an endless supply on this island?”

“Well, a let’s say a very big crate of it washed up on shore. It’s very possible in this day and age.”

He hummed in agreement. “I’d never be that practical, I would be absolutely useless and die within five minutes.”

“If you’re stuck with me, you’d be fine.”

“Would you want to be stuck on an island with me?”

You shrugged; it didn’t seem like such a bad thing. “Okay, so if you were stuck on an island with me being MacGyver, what would you bring?”

“Would there be any electricity?”

“Obviously not.”

“Okay, a cozy blanket, an endless supply of chocolates, that’ll wash up with your duct tape, and writing material.”

“Oh, good choices, why the writing material?”

“If you’re spending all day MacGyvering I need to provide the entertainment when we’re relaxing at night by the fire.”

“I’ll have to learn how to make a fire then.” The thought of cosying up by the fire seemed a lovely idea to both of you.

*****

Dieter spied a bag in the seat when he got in the car today. The plushiness almost sprung out of its vacuum sealed confines when he opened it.

“Is that the right size?”

He hugged it close to him, snuffling his nose to the softness. He just nodded and hummed his approval.

Every night since then, he held it close to him when he slept.

*****

“Did you see the rack on her? If only she’d wear something a little low cut so I can see the goods.”

Dieter tried to ignore the comments from Blake, his co-star. The man playing the part of the killer of his wife really looked the part.

“All she needs to do is lean over so I can just take a nice handful and…”

“Find yourself in jail from harassment.”

“I’m just having fun, admiring the view.”

Dieter shook his head in disgust. He knew Blake was causing you discomfort. Every time the man left the trailer, he’d leave with a big grin on his face while you had the opposite. The boxful of cookies was still full, so he knew you never offered the slimy man one crumb. It was the first thing he noticed when he went into the makeup trailer after filming for the day. That was after he noticed the hurt look on your face. The sunshine had gone from your face, and he wanted to see that light of happiness.

“So, I watched that lobster movie.”

You perked up, “You did?”

He nodded, “You were right, it was a bit weird, but also depressingly terrifying.”

“That’s the whole point.”

“I’d never find love in those 45 days.”

“And then they would have to turn you into a chicken.”

“Actually, I’ve changed my mind on that. I know they wouldn’t turn me into a hen, so I’d have to go with Colin Farrell’s character and have myself turned into a lobster.”

A laugh escaped your lips, “You’d be a lobster?”

“It makes more sense for me.”

“So we’d be lobster together?”

“Didn’t you want to be that punching shrimp?”

You shrugged, “I don’t think they’d have the ability to put me in such a tiny animal,” you turned away from him to put away the used prosthetics, “I happened to watch A Midsummer Night’s Dream.”

“You did?” What version?”

“It was the National Theatre Live version.”

“Oh, that one’s my favourite.”

“It was certainly different. Swapping Oberon and Titiania was absolute genius. Way more enjoyable to what I had to learn at school.”

“Kinda wish I did that version at school, I’d love to be in it.”

“As Oberon?”

“You think I’d be a good Oberon?” you nodded.

“Who would you like to be your Bottom?” that question brought a smile to your face and to his.

“Oh, it’d have to be someone tall and handsome. Maybe David Harbour, I know he’s done some Shakespeare.”

“He’s pretty good on Stranger Things. Grumpy guy with a heart of gold is one of my favourite tropes.”

He gave a bashful look, afraid to admit the show was too scary for him “I haven’t actually seen that.”

“You what? But it’s so good,” he grumbled out an apology, “Well, you don’t get a cookie until you do,” but before he could shed a tear from his puppy dog eyes you handed him the box of cookies, “I’m just kidding, I’d never deprive you of a cookie.”

“You’re too sweet to me.”

You would have said the same but smiled instead.

*****

The next day you had just finished putting on Dieter’s prosthetics and dreading having to do work on Blake. He reminded you of every creep in several horror films. You just wished that an unfortunate event would befall him, maybe involving a lawnmower over his private area.

Thankfully, it didn’t take long to do a bullet wound to the head prothesis so you wouldn’t have to put up with the leers to your figure for too long. He took his chair with a grin that belonged on a clown handing out balloons to victims.

You started counting down the minutes until the ordeal was over when Dieter didn’t get up from his seat.

“I don’t need to be on set right now, do you mind if I stay here where it’s cooler?”

You nodded, quietly giving yourself a cry of relief. While you were applying the wound makeup, Dieter glared at Blake with such intensity, any sudden wrong move would result in instant death.

“What sort of animal would you be?” Blake gave Dieter a look that questioned his sanity. “If you could be any animal in the world, what would you be?”

He stupidly gained some confidence with his answer, “I’d like to be a lion. I like the thought of hunting down my prey,” every nerve in your body was on high alert, ready to run, “And I’d be in charge of my own pride of lady lions, be king of the jungle.”

“Lions don’t live in the jungle,” you looked at Dieter, “And male lions are very lazy, it’s the females who do most of the work and keep the pride together. Usually, they get cast out of the pride once they’re too old or useless.” He looked at Blake like this was common knowledge. Before he could get an answer, Dieter continued, “If you were stuck on a deserted island, what three things would you have with you?”

“Why the fuck would I be on a desert island?”

“Oh, you never know, someone might have the sudden desire to maroon you on one.”

He was giving a look that said it would most certainly happen and it certainly soured the cocky attitude in Blake, and he left with a fake bullet wound to his head but feeling like it was a real blow to his brains.

“How do you know so much about lions?”

“My sisters like ruining my childhood by pointing out everything that was wrong with The Lion King. I guess all those facts stayed in my head.”

“Yeah, sisters can do that,” before he could question that statement, you said quietly, “Um, thanks for staying around.”

“Oh, no problem.”

“I felt safer so, thanks,” your voice dropped to a whisper, “I like feeling safe.”

Dieter just mumbled another no worries and left the makeup trailer.

*****

That night, Dieter hugged his lobster plushie close, sadly musing to himself.

“Oh, Mr. Lobster what am I going to do? The most beautiful person in the world has walked into my life and soon she’ll walk out of it. She never mentioned a partner, but she must have someone, she’s that amazing. Although she talked of us being lobsters together, is that a clue?” he looked at the lobsters’ soft eyes which gave no answer, he sighed, “Oh well, I guess it’s just perpetual bachelorhood for us my lobster friend. Yes indeed.”

*****

Roughly one year later…

“Hey Dieter, I found this cute lobster plushie in the spare room,” he popped his head up from the couch to see you holding said plushie, “This is giving me some kind of déjà vu. Didn’t I say that I’d like to be a lobster? A Muppet lobster?”

He tried to disappear into the couch, “I don’t know. Why would I remember such an adorable thing like that?”

“I did because I rewatched Muppets Treasure Island. Wait a minute, did you get this because of me?”

“It wasn’t sexual in any way,” he stood up now in front of you, “I just wanted something cute and soft to cuddle with at night to help me sleep and now I have you.”

“Did it help? With the sleeping?” he nodded, “I’m glad and it’s very sweet and you’re very sweet,” you cuddled close to him, “Should we put it somewhere special?”

“So long as it’s not the bedroom,” you looked at him in question, “Do you want it staring at us while we’re having sex?”

“To the spare room it goes.”

Films/TV referenced: Chicken Run (2000), The Lobster (2015), Muppets Treasure Island (1996), Stranger Things (2016-), The Lion King (1994)

Lovingly tagging @boliv-jenta @simpingcowboy @ellenmunn @o-sacra-virgo-laudes-tibi @brilliantopposite187 @chaithetics @myloveistoolittle @cevans-is-classic @glshmbl

[average-guy-reviews]

The Banshees Of Inisherin (2022)

"On a remote island off the coast of Ireland, Pádraic is devastated when his buddy Colm suddenly puts an end to their lifelong friendship. With help from his sister and a troubled young islander, Pádraic sets out to repair the damaged relationship by any means necessary. However, as Colm's resolve only strengthens, he soon delivers an ultimatum that leads to shocking consequences."

From the moment I first saw the trailer I was hooked, and needed to see this film. I thought, a little, that I had an idea of what I was in for. I could not have been more wrong. Every other time I have been to the silver screen this year I have just watched a film. This? This was heartbreaking cinema at its finest. It leads you on a journey, draws you in and makes you feel deeply for each of the main characters........and then it plunges an ice cold finger of heartbreak deep into your chest. It is pure drama, with just a sprinkling of lighter moments...though they are few and far between.

Set early in the 20th century, with the Irish Civil War as a backdrop, the film is set on the small island of Inisherin. It's the kind of place where everyone knows everyone, and information spreads like wildfire. Focussing on Pádraic, played by Colin Farrell, and Colm, played by Brendan Gleeson, it tells the tale of two friends. Gleeson's character suddenly announces that he no longer likes, or wants to be around, Farrell's Pádraic. He feels like he wants to concentrate on writing music so that he'll be remembered long past his death...."No-one remembers you for being nice!"

I've always been impressed by both men, despite some questionable performances in the past, but they opened my eyes, and my heart, with their skills on screen in this film. They are quite simply brilliant. The chemistry between the actors is electric, despite the anatgonistic relationship the characters have. Farrell is playing in a style I have never seen him in before. He brings a heart-wrenching character fully to life, a character who is not the brightest and, at first, doesn't understand why his old friend no longer likes him. His is a path I wouldn't want to follow and Farrell marches us down it whether we want to go or not, and by the end I was both grateful and disheartened to have walked that walk. Farrell is excellent.

Brendan Gleeson, as the gruff fiddler Colm, is on fine form. Playing a man that is clearly smarter than Pádraic he has the unenviable job of trying to explain why he no longer likes his friend. As an audience it's clear, and Gleeson's delivery of his explanations is exquisite, as is the build up of frustration. Colm makes a promise to Pádraic about what he will do in a certain situation and, without specific spoilers, he is a man of his word. Gleeson gives us a masterclass in emotional build up, and his and Farrell's performances should be on any curriculum for dramatic acting.

There are two more performances that need to be noted. Barry Keoghan, as Dominic, is cast as the village "gom" (idiot) and is both frustratingly annoying, and loveable to a degree. Early on we discover he is a victim of domestic violence at the hands of his policeman father. Keoghan's performance never wavers, and it is easy to cultivate an emotional attachment to someone who doesn't really understand why he is treated as he is, as well as simply accepting that it is what it is. I don't know Keoghan's work well but this is a damn fine performance.

The last of the four main characters is Pádraic's sister, Siobhán, played by Kerry Condon. To call her the least of the four is both accurate and yet unfair, because her performance is by no means anything that should be looked at as the least. A much smarter sister she has to deal with her brother's difficulties in navigating what is happening. She helps him, sometimes in ways he may not know, and Condon is delightful to watch as she weaves her way through her character's life. She is a welcome addition to an all round wonderful cast.

The film itself has been crafted beautifully. Martin McDonagh, in the director's chair, made decisions that blended everything together seamlessly. His choices of shots across the green, yet dark, landscape of Inisherin, and the amalgamation of music into the story is just so well done. I really hope he is as proud of this film as he deerves to be. He has given me a glimpse into a society I could never have seen, and I thank him for that.

This is a slow film, with a long build up. I don't say this to be negative. Far from it. The pacing of the film is perfect for the story, and the build up of tensions and difficulties is done as well as it may be possible to do. I have been in action packed films and been bored, but at no point in this slow, deliberate, movie did i ever feel less than engaged.

Overall this is brilliant piece of cinema. Excellent performances and a great direction have brought a new story to the screen that i believe could eventualy go down in the books as a classic. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and don't do this lightly, but it is getting a 10/10, with a maximum recommendation to go and see it if you can. I know it won't be for everyome, and that's okay. It was for me, and I am more than glad to have seen it.

[beautifulgiants]

Watch "Colin Farrell, Tom Bateman & Sahajak Poo Boonthankit Interview: Thirteen Lives" on YouTube

Colin Farrell, Tom Bateman & Sahajak Poo Boonthankit Interview: Thirteen Lives

BY

ASH CROSSAN

PUBLISHED AUG 05, 2022

Thirteen Lives stars Colin Farrell, Tom Bateman & Sahajak "Poo" Boonthankit share the emotions they experienced during the rescue in real-time.

Ron Howard's penchant for bringing history to the film screen is in full effect in Thirteen Lives, which is now available to stream on Prime Video. In it, the Apollo 13 director recreates the events of the 2018 Tham Luang cave rescue, allowing audiences to understand why it was so dangerous for the boys trapped in a flooded cave - and how exactly the brave divers were able to get them out.

The stars of Thirteen Lives were just as affected by the gripping true story when it went down as viewers around the world were, so reliving the tense times from another perspective was a unique experience. Colin Farrell and Tom Bateman play two of the divers who traveled to help, while Thai actor Sahajak "Poo" Boonthankit (Fistful of Vengeance) plays Governor Narongsak.

Screen Rant spoke to Bateman, Farrell and Boonthankit about how they experienced the events of Thirteen Lives in real-time before reliving them on the set of the film.

Screen Rant: What a movie; what a story. I remember this happening, but I feel like the movie just elicited so many positive feelings for me of selflessness. Do you remember when this happened? And what stuck out to you most about this story?

Tom Bateman: I think the first [time] that I got really into it was when they found the boys. I remember thinking, "Those boys were being stuck in the cave, and when they found them." And then it just became this every day, checking in on the news on how they were doing. And I just remember the beauty of when they said, "They've got them out." Everyone was running around, and it's all anyone was talking about at the time. It was a beautiful, very special time.

Because, usually with the news, you're not really bonded by joy. You're bonded by bad things. "Oh, my God, have you seen this awful thing? This awful thing." I think I can count on maybe one hand the amount of times you have a news story like this, that just makes you happy and full of joy and hopeful and want to be a better person.

Colin Farrell: And that was the thing about it, though, wasn't it? That you were caught between catastrophe and the potential of what actually came to pass, because we saw it in real-time.

So, it was actually a horrible thing that was going on. And we were stuck in the fear of the present, where we believed globally that the children were still alive. But we didn't know if, while we were talking about them being still alive, they were actually dying. Nobody knew until the guys got to them, and then there was some confirmation that they were there. And then there was back and forth; there were certain dives happening. But, as Tom said, when the moment came that they started coming out and the ambulance started disappearing and airlifting them and airlifting them. And the information wasn't shared of who was out,; how many were out.

And even when the mission started, it was all very cloak and dagger. All of a sudden, all the press were pushed back and nobody knew exactly what the means were [by which] they were going to be extracted.

Poo, I want to hear, because I can't believe we worked together and I never heard from you. I never asked you, because we were all just working, so we were involved in the present together of making the film. What was it like for you, man? You were in the country?

Sahajak Poo Boonthankit: Yes, I was. I was in Thailand at the time. But I think it's very different for me, personally. I always say I heard about the boys getting stuck, and... At first, I was actually angry at the boys. "Why did they even go in there? What drove you? What took you in there?"

And then, you found out, "Okay, they didn't intend to go in when it was raining. It rained after they went in." Okay. Five days, six days go on. I'm saying, "Okay, maybe they're dead." And now, being Thai, you start to sit in front of your mantle and you pray. You light your [prayer sticks] and everything, and hope that they come out well and alive.

Colin Farrell: Was the whole country doing that, you think? The majority?

Sahajak Boonthankit: Yes, I do believe so. I do believe so. It's a cultural thing.

And then, on the seventh, eighth, ninth day, I'm saying, "Wait, I have four children. What if one of them was in there?" Now, it gets really intense. Then you hear people are coming from all over the world to help, and I can't even do anything. I don't know how to dive. I can't do anything. So, I'm just sitting there, shaking, praying, hoping. And once they came out, once we heard that the kids were all well, it was a big relief.

But it wasn't until I read the script that I understood the inner workings of everything, and all the hair stood on end. It was amazing.

Screen Rant: Because I'm a diver, I'm like, "Why can't they just dive and get them out?" I did not understand. And then, when you watch the movie, you're like, "Okay."

Colin Farrell: It's not safe.

Tom Bateman: Is it normal diving, or cave diving you do?

I've done some cave diving - not like that. Colin, I take it you're not going to keep your certification going?

Colin Farrell: Ash, it's a certified fact that your balls are bigger than mine. Because I was asked by a couple of the lads, "When you finish the film, are you going to do some cave diving?" And I said, "Absolutely not."

I mean, they did build these extravagant cave systems. There was four or five different networks that were based on the ordinance of the Tham Luang cave system. There was pinch points and bits that went down and stalactites and stuff. It was tight in there, and we had safety divers and all that stuff, but you're still in water and still looking up, and there's a roof on top of your head.

Tom, you found it uncomfortable at times, didn't you? I mean, I really did.

Tom Bateman: Thank you so much for that. One of my favorite memories, though, is I remember you and me both - I think it was Viggo, you, me, Joel and Paul. And we all got stuck in the middle. The camera-

Colin Farrell: Disaster. And I have Viggo's fin in my f**king face, and someone pushing me from behind.

Tom Bateman: Exactly. I got Paul falling asleep on my leg. But I remember coming out of it and this beautiful moment [where] I think we grabbed each other, like, "You good? You good?" I'm like, "Yeah, I'm good. I don't want to go back down there again." They're like, "Okay guys, resetting, you're going again." No, I don't want to do it.

Colin Farrell: And it was a 4-foot dive with 20 safety guys in 2.5 feet of water. I did find it nerve-wracking.

The difference between... I'd done a little bit of open water scuba diving, but it's night and day from anything that has a seal on it. I don't know how they do it. It's just a very different mentality that I don't really have. I have a little bit of - don't want to diagnose myself with panic syndrome, but the head can get away from me pretty quickly

[grigori77]

2020 in Movies - My Top 30 Fave Movies (Part 2)

20.  ONWARD – Disney and Pixar’s best digitally animated family feature of 2020 (beating the admittedly impressive Soul to the punch) clearly has a love of fantasy roleplay games like Dungeons & Dragons, its quirky modern-day AU take populated by fantastical races and creatures seemingly tailor-made for the geek crowd … needless to say, me and many of my friends absolutely loved it.  That doesn’t mean that the classic Disney ideals of love, family and believing in yourself have been side-lined in favour of fan-service – this is as heartfelt, affecting and tearful as their previous standouts, albeit with plenty of literal magic added to the metaphorical kind.  The central premise is a clever one – once upon a time, magic was commonplace, but over the years technology came along to make life easier, so that in the present day the various races (elves, centaurs, fauns, pixies, goblins and trolls among others) get along fine without it. Then timid elf Ian Lightfoot (Tom Holland) receives a wizard’s staff for his sixteenth birthday, a bequeathed gift from his father, who died before he was born, with instructions for a spell that could bring him back to life for one whole day.  Encouraged by his brash, over-confident wannabe adventurer elder brother Barley (Chris Pratt), Ian tries it out, only for the spell to backfire, leaving them with the animated bottom half of their father and just 24 hours to find a means to restore the rest of him before time runs out.  Cue an “epic quest” … needless to say, this is another top-notch offering from the original masters of the craft, a fun, affecting and thoroughly infectious family-friendly romp with a winning sense of humour and inspired, flawless world-building.  Holland and Pratt are both fantastic, their instantly believable, ill-at-ease little/big brother chemistry effortlessly driving the story through its ingenious paces, and the ensuing emotional fireworks are hilarious and heart-breaking in equal measure, while there’s typically excellent support from Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Elaine from Seinfeld) as Ian and Barley’s put-upon but supportive mum, Laurel, Octavia Spencer as once-mighty adventurer-turned-restaurateur “Corey” the Manticore and Mel Rodriguez (Getting On, The Last Man On Earth) as overbearing centaur cop (and Laurel’s new boyfriend) Colt Bronco.  The film marks the sophomore feature gig for Dan Scanlon, who debuted with 2013’s sequel Monsters University, and while that was enjoyable enough I ultimately found it non-essential – no such verdict can be levelled against THIS film, the writer-director delivering magnificently in all categories, while the animation team have outdone themselves in every scene, from the exquisite environments and character/creature designs to some fantastic (and frequently delightfully bonkers) set-pieces, while there’s a veritable riot of brilliant RPG in-jokes to delight geekier viewers (gelatinous cube! XD).  Massive, unadulterated fun, frequently hilarious and absolutely BURSTING with Disney’s trademark heart, this was ALMOST my animated feature of the year.  More on that later …

19.  THE GENTLEMEN – Guy Ritchie’s been having a rough time with his last few movies (The Man From UNCLE didn’t do too bad but it wasn’t exactly a hit and was largely overlooked or simply ignored, while intended franchise-starter King Arthur: Legend of the Sword was largely derided and suffered badly on release, dying a quick death financially – it’s a shame on both counts, because I really liked them), so it’s nice to see him having some proper success with his latest, even if he has basically reverted to type to do it.  Still, when his newest London gangster flick is THIS GOOD it seems churlish to quibble – this really is what he does best, bringing together a collection of colourful geezers and shaking up their status quo, then standing back and letting us enjoy the bloody, expletive-riddled results. This particularly motley crew is another winning selection, led by Matthew McConaughey as ruthlessly successful cannabis baron Mickey Pearson, who’s looking to retire from the game by selling off his massive and highly lucrative enterprise for a most tidy sum (some $400,000,000 to be precise) to up-and-coming fellow American ex-pat Matthew Berger (Succession’s Jeremy Strong, oozing sleazy charm), only for local Chinese triad Dry Eye (Crazy Rich Asians’ Henry Golding, chewing the scenery with enthusiasm) to start throwing spanners into the works with the intention of nabbing the deal for himself for a significant discount.  Needless to say Mickey’s not about to let that happen … McConaughey is ON FIRE here, the best he’s been since Dallas Buyers Club in my opinion, clearly having great fun sinking his teeth into this rich character and Ritchie’s typically sparkling, razor-witted dialogue, and he’s ably supported by a quality ensemble cast, particularly co-star Charlie Hunnam as Mickey’s ice-cold, steel-nerved right-hand-man Raymond Smith, Downton Abbey’s Michelle Dockery as his classy, strong-willed wife Rosalind, Colin Farrell as a wise-cracking, quietly exasperated MMA trainer and small-time hood simply known as the Coach (who gets many of the film’s best lines), and, most notably, Hugh Grant as the film’s nominal narrator, thoroughly morally bankrupt private investigator Fletcher, who consistently steals the film.  This is Guy Ritchie at his very best – a twisty rug-puller of a plot that constantly leaves you guessing, brilliantly observed and richly drawn characters you can’t help loving in spite of the fact there’s not a single hero among them, a deliciously unapologetic, politically incorrect sense of humour and a killer soundtrack.  Getting the cinematic year off to a phenomenal start, it’s EASILY Ritchie’s best film since Sherlock Holmes, and a strong call-back to the heady days of Snatch (STILL my favourite) and Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels.  Here’s hoping he’s on a roll again, eh?

18.  SPONTANEOUS – one of the year’s biggest under-the-radar surprise hits for me was one which I actually might not have caught if things had been a little more normal and ordered.  Thankfully with all the lockdown and cinematic shutdown bollocks going on, this fantastically subversive and deeply satirical indie teen comedy horror came along at the perfect time, and I completely flipped out over it.  Now those who know me know I don’t tend to gravitate towards teen cinema, but like all those other exceptions I’ve loved over the years, this one had a brilliantly compulsive hook I just couldn’t turn down – small-town high-schooler Mara (Knives Out and Netflix’ Cursed’s Katherine Langford) is your typical cool outsider kid, smart, snarky and just putting up with the scene until she can graduate and get as far away as possible … until one day in her senior year one of her classmates just inexplicably explodes. Like her peers, she’s shocked and she mourns, then starts to move on … until it happens again.  As the death toll among the senior class begins to mount, it becomes clear something weird is going on, but Mara has other things on her mind because the crisis has, for her, had an unexpected benefit – without it she wouldn’t have fallen in love with like-minded oddball new kid Dylan (Lean On Pete and Words On Bathroom Walls’ Charlie Plummer). The future’s looking bright, but only if they can both live to see it … this is a wickedly intelligent film, powered by a skilfully executed script and a wonderfully likeable young cast who consistently steer their characters around the potential cliched pitfalls of this kind of cinema, while debuting writer-director Brian Duffield (already a rising star thanks to scripts for Underwater, The Babysitter and blacklist darling Jane Got a Gun among others) show he’s got as much talent and flair for crafting truly inspired cinema as he has for thinking it up in the first place, delivering some impressively offbeat set-pieces and several neat twists you frequently don’t see coming ahead of time.  Langford and Plummer as a sassy, spicy pair who are easy to root for without ever getting cloying or sweet, while there’s glowing support from the likes of Hayley Law (Rioverdale, Altered Carbon, The New Romantic) as Mara’s best friend Tess, Piper Perabo and Transparent’s Rob Huebel as her increasingly concerned parents, and Insecure’s Yvonne Orji as Agent Rosetti, the beleaguered government employee sent to spearhead the investigation into exactly what’s happening to these kids.  Quirky, offbeat and endlessly inventive, this is one of those interesting instances where I’m glad they pushed the horror elements into the background so we could concentrate on the comedy, but more importantly these wonderfully well-realised and vital characters – there are some skilfully executed shocks, but far more deep belly laughs, and there’s bucketloads of heart to eclipse the gore.  Another winning debut from a talent I intend to watch with great interest in the future.

17.  HAMILTON – arriving just as Black Lives Matter reached fever-pitch levels, this feature presentation of the runaway Broadway musical smash-hit could not have been better timed. Shot over three nights during the show’s 2016 run with the original cast and cut together with specially created “setup shots”, it’s an immersive experience that at once puts you right in amongst the audience (at times almost a character themselves, never seen but DEFINITELY heard) but also lets you experience the action up close.  And what action – it’s an incredible show, a thoroughly fascinating piece of work that reads like something very staid and proper on paper (an all-encompassing biographical account of the life and times of American Founding Father Alexander Hamilton) but, in execution, becomes something very different and EXTREMELY vital.  The execution certainly couldn’t be further from the usual period biopic fare this kind of historical subject matter usually gets (although in the face of recent high quality revisionist takes like Marie Antoinette, The Great and Tesla it’s not SO surprising), while the cast is not at all what you’d expect – with very few notable exceptions the cast is almost entirely people of colour, despite the fact that the real life individuals they’re playing were all very white indeed.  Every single one of them is also an absolute revelation – the show’s writer-composer Lin-Manuel Miranda (already riding high on the success of In the Heights) carries the central role of Hamilton with effortless charm and raw star power, Leslie Odom Jr. (Smash, Murder On the Orient Express) is duplicitously complex as his constant nemesis Aaron Burr, Christopher Jackson (In the Heights, Moana, Bull) oozes integrity and nobility as his mentor and friend George Washington, Phillipa Soo is sweet and classy as his wife Eliza while Renée Elise Goldsberry (The Immortal Life of Henrietta Jacks, Altered Carbon) is fiery and statuesque as her sister Angelica Schuyler (the one who got away), and Jonathan Groff (Mindhunter) consistently steals every scene he’s in as fiendish yet childish fan favourite King George III, but the show (and the film) ultimately belongs to veritable powerhouse Daveed Diggs (Blindspotting, The Good Lord Bird) in a spectacular duel role, starting subtly but gaining scene-stealing momentum as French Revolutionary Gilbert du Motier, the Marquis de Lafayette, before EXPLODING onto the stage in the second half as indomitable third American President Thomas Jefferson.  Not having seen the stage show, I was taken completely by surprise by this, revelling in its revisionist genius and offbeat, quirky hip-hop charm, spellbound by the skilful ease with which is takes the sometimes quite dull historical fact and skews it into something consistently entertaining and absorbing, transported by the catchy earworm musical numbers and thoroughly tickled by the delightfully cheeky sense of humour strung throughout (at least when I wasn’t having my heart broken by moments of raw dramatic power). Altogether it’s a pretty unique cinematic experience I wish I could have actually gotten to see on the big screen, and one I’ve consistently recommended to all my friends, even the ones who don’t usually like musicals.  As far as I’m concerned it doesn’t need a proper Les Misérables style screen adaptation – this is about as perfect a presentation as the show could possibly hope for.

16.  SPUTNIK – summer’s horror highlight (despite SERIOUSLY tough competition) was a guaranteed sleeper hit that I almost missed entirely, stumbling across the trailer one day on YouTube and getting bowled over by its potential, prompting me to hunt it down by any means necessary.  The feature debut of Russian director Egor Abramenko, this first contact sci-fi chiller is about as far from E.T. as it’s possible to get, sharing some of the same DNA as Carpenter’s The Thing but proudly carving its own path with consummate skill and definitely signalling great things to come from its brand new helmer and relative unknown screenwriters Oleg Malovichko and Andrei Zolotarev.  Oksana Akinshina (probably best known in the West for her powerful climactic cameo in The Bourne Supremacy) is the beating heart of the film as neurophysiologist Tatyana Yuryevna Klimova, brought in to aid in the investigation in the Russian wilderness circa 1983 after an orbital research mission goes horribly wrong.  One of the cosmonauts dies horribly, while the other, Konstantin (The Duelist’s Pyotr Fyodorov) seems unharmed, but it quickly becomes clear that he’s now the host for something decidedly extraterrestrial and potentially terrifying, and as Tatyana becomes more deeply embroiled in her assignment she comes to realise that her superiors, particularly mysterious Red Army project leader Colonel Semiradov (The PyraMMMid’s Fyodor Bondarchuk), have far more insidious plans for Konstantin and his new “friend” than she could ever imagine. This is about as dark, intense and nightmarish as this particular sub-genre gets, a magnificently icky body horror that slowly builds its tension as we’re gradually exposed to the various truths and the awful gravity of the situation slowly reveals itself, punctuated by skilfully executed shocks and some particularly horrifying moments when the evils inflicted by the humans in charge prove far worse than anything the alien can do, while the ridiculously talented writers have a field day pulling the rug out from under us again and again, never going for the obvious twist and keeping us guessing right to the devastating ending, while the beautifully crafted digital creature effects are nothing short of astonishing and thoroughly creepy.  Akinshina dominates the film with her unbridled grace, vulnerability and integrity, the relationship that develops between Tatyana and Konstantin (Fyodorov delivering a beautifully understated turn belying deep inner turmoil) feeling realistically earned as it goes from tentatively wary to tragically bittersweet, while Bondarchuk invests the Colonel with a nuanced air of tarnished authority and restrained brutality that made him one of my top screen villains for the year.  One of 2020’s great sleeper hits, I can’t speak of this film highly enough – it’s a genuine revelation, an instant classic for whom I’ll sing its praises for years to come, and I wish enormous future success to all the creative talents involved.

15.  THE INVISIBLE MAN – looks like third time’s a charm for Leigh Whannell, writer-director of my ALMOST horror movie of the year (more on that later) – while he’s had immense success as a horror writer over the years (co-creator of both the Saw and Insidious franchises), as a director his first two features haven’t exactly set the world alight, with debut Insidious: Chapter III garnering similar takes to the rest of the series but ultimately turning out to be a bit of a damp squib quality-wise, while his second feature Upgrade was a stone-cold masterpiece that was (rightly) EXTREMELY well received critically, but ultimately snuck in under the radar and has remained a stubbornly hidden gem since. No such problems with his third feature, though – his latest collaboration with producer Jason Blum and the insanely lucrative Blumhouse Pictures has proven a massive hit both financially AND with reviewers, and deservedly so.  Having given up on trying to create a shared cinematic universe inhabited by their classic monsters, Universal resolved to concentrate on standalones to showcase their elite properties, and their first try is a rousing success, Whannell bringing HG Wells’ dark and devious human monster smack into the 21st Century as only he can.  The result is a surprisingly subtle piece of work, much more a lethally precise exercise in cinematic sleight of hand and extraordinary acting than flashy visual effects, strictly adhering to the Blumhouse credo of maximum returns for minimum bucks as the story is stripped down to its bare essentials and allowed to play out without any unnecessary weight.  The Handmaid’s Tale’s Elizabeth Moss once again confirms what a masterful actress she is as she brings all her performing weapons to bear in the role of Cecelia “Cee” Kass, the cloistered wife of affluent but monstrously abusive optics pioneer Aidan Griffin (Netflix’ The Haunting of Hill House’s Oliver Jackson-Cohen), who escapes his clutches in the furiously tense opening sequence and goes to ground with the help of her closest childhood friend, San Francisco cop James Lanier (Leverage’s Aldis Hodge) and his teenage daughter Sydney (A Wrinkle in Time’s Storm Reid).  Two weeks later, Aidan commits suicide, leaving Cee with a fortune to start her life over (with the proviso that she’s never ruled mentally incompetent), but as she tries to find her way in the world again little things start going wrong for her, and she begins to question if there might be something insidious going on.  As her nerves start to unravel, she begins to suspect that Aidan is still alive, still very much in her life, fiendishly toying with her and her friends, but no-one can see him.  Whannell plays her paranoia up for all it’s worth, skilfully teasing out the scares so that, just like her friends, we begin to wonder if it might all be in her head after all, before a spectacular mid-movie reveal throws the switch into high gear and the true threat becomes clear.  The lion’s share of the film’s immense success must of course go to Moss – her performance is BEYOND a revelation, a blistering career best that totally powers the whole enterprise, and it goes without saying that she’s the best thing in this.  Even so, she has sterling support from Hodge and Reid, as well as Love Child’s Harriet Dyer as Cee’s estranged big sister Emily and Wonderland’s Michael Dorman as Adrian’s slimy, spineless lawyer brother Tom, and, while he doesn’t have much actual (ahem) “screen time”, Jackson-Cohen delivers a fantastically icy, subtly malevolent turn which casts a large “shadow” over the film.  This is one of my very favourite Blumhouse films, a pitch-perfect psychological chiller that keeps the tension cranked up unbearably tight and never lets go, Whannell once again displaying uncanny skill with expert jump-scares, knuckle-whitening chills and a truly astounding standout set-piece that easily goes down as one of the top action sequences of 2020. Undoubtedly the best version of Wells’ story to date, this goes a long way in repairing the damage of Universal’s abortive “Dark Universe” efforts, as well as showcasing a filmmaking master at the very height of his talents.

14.  EXTRACTION – the Coronavirus certainly has threw a massive spanner in the works of the year’s cinematic calendar – among many other casualties to the blockbuster shunt, the latest (and most long-awaited) MCU movie, Black Widow, should have opened to further record-breaking box office success at the end of spring, but instead the theatres were all closed and virtually all the heavyweights were pushed back or shelved indefinitely.  Thank God, then, for the streaming services, particularly Hulu, Amazon and Netflix, the latter of which provided a perfect movie for us to see through the key transition into the summer blockbuster season, an explosively flashy big budget action thriller ushered in by MCU alumni the Russo Brothers (who produced and co-wrote this adaptation of Ciudad, a graphic novel that Joe Russo co-created with Ande Parks and Fernando Leon Gonzalez) and barely able to contain the sheer star-power wattage of its lead, Thor himself.  Chris Hemsworth plays Tyler Rake, a former Australian SAS operative who hires out his services to an extraction operation under the command of mercenary Nik Khan (The Patience Stone’s Golshifteh Farahani), brought in to liberate Ovi Mahajan (Rudhraksh Jaiswal in his first major role), the pre-teen son of incarcerated Indian crime lord Ovi Sr. (Pankaj Tripathi), who has been abducted by Bangladeshi rival Amir Asif (Priyanshu Painyuli).  The rescue itself goes perfectly, but when the time comes for the hand-off the team is double-crossed and Tyler is left stranded in the middle of Dhaka with no choice but to keep Ovi alive as every corrupt cop and street gang in the city closes in around them.  This is the feature debut of Sam Hargrave, the latest stuntman to try his hand at directing, so he certainly knows his way around an action set-piece, and the result is a thoroughly breathless adrenaline rush of a film, bursting at the seams with spectacular fights, gun battles and car chases, dominated by a stunning sustained sequence that plays out in one long shot, guaranteed to leave jaws lying on the floor.  Not that there should be any surprise – Hargrave cut his teeth as a stunt coordinator for the Russos on Captain America: Civil War and their Avengers films.  That said, he displays strong talent for the quieter disciplines of filmmaking too, delivering quality character development and drawing out consistently noteworthy performances from his cast.  Of course, Hemsworth can do the action stuff in his sleep, but there’s a lot more to Tyler than just his muscle, the MCU veteran investing him with real wounded vulnerability and a tragic fatalism which colours every scene, while Jaiswal is exceptional throughout, showing plenty of promise for the future, and there’s strong support from Farahani and Painyuli, as well as Stranger Things’ David Harbour as world-weary retired merc Gaspard, and a particularly impressive, muscular turn from Randeep Hooda (Once Upon a Time in Mumbai) as Saju, a former Para and Ovi’s bodyguard, who’s determined to take possession of the boy himself, even if he has to go through Tyler to get him.  This is action cinema that really deserves to be seen on the big screen – I watched it twice in a week and would happily have paid for two trips to the cinema for it if I could have.  As we looked down the barrel of a summer season largely devoid of blockbuster fare, I couldn’t recommend this enough.  Thank the gods for Netflix …

13.  THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 – although it’s definitely a film that really benefitted enormously from releasing on Netflix during the various lockdowns, this was one of the blessed few I actually got to see during one of the UK’s frustratingly rare lulls when cinemas were actually OPEN.  Rather perversely it therefore became one of my favourite cinematic experiences of 2020, but then I’m just as much a fan of well-made cerebral films as I am of the big, immersive blockbuster EXPERIENCES, so this probably still would have been a standout in a normal year. Certainly if this was a purely CRITICAL list for the year this probably would have placed high in the Top Ten … Aaron Sorkin is a writer whose work I have ardently admired ever since he went from esteemed playwright to in-demand talent for both the big screen AND the small with A Few Good Men, and TTOTC7 is just another in a long line of consistently impressive, flawlessly written works rife with addictive quickfire dialogue, beautifully observed characters and rewardingly propulsive narrative storytelling (therefore resting comfortably amongst the well-respected likes of The West Wing, Charlie Wilson’s War, Moneyball and The Social Network).  It also marks his second feature as a director (after fascinating and incendiary debut Molly’s Game), and once again he’s gone for true story over fiction, tackling the still controversial subject of the infamous 1968 trial of the “ringleaders” of the infamous riots which marred Chicago’s Diplomatic National Convention five months earlier, in which thousands of hippies and college students protesting the Vietnam War clashed with police.  Spurred on by the newly-instated Presidential Administration of Richard Nixon to make some examples, hungry up-and-coming prosecutor Richard Schultz (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is confident in his case, while the Seven – who include respected and astute student activist Tom Hayden (Eddie Redmayne) and confrontational counterculture firebrands Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen) and Jerry Rubin (Succession’s Jeremy Strong) – are the clear underdogs.  They’re a divided bunch (particularly Hayden and Hoffman, who never mince their words about what little regard they hold for each other), and they’re up against the combined might of the U.S. Government, while all they have on their side is pro-bono lawyer and civil rights activist William Kunstler (Mark Rylance), who’s sharp, driven and thoroughly committed to the cause but clearly massively outmatched … not to mention the fact that the judge presiding over the case is Julius Hoffman (Frank Langella), a fierce and uncompromising conservative who’s clearly 100% on the Administration’s side, and who might in fact be stark raving mad (he also frequently goes to great lengths to make it clear to all concerned that he is NOT related to Abbie).  Much as we’ve come to expect from Sorkin, this is cinema of grand ideals and strong characters, not big spectacle and hard action, and all the better for it – he’s proved time and again that he’s one of the very best creative minds in Hollywood when it comes to intelligent, thought-provoking and engrossing thinking-man’s entertainment, and this is pure par for the course, keeping us glued to the screen from the skilfully-executed whirlwind introductory montage to the powerfully cathartic climax, and every varied and brilliant scene in-between.  This is heady stuff, focusing on what’s still an extremely thorny issue made all the more urgently relevant and timely given what was (and still is) going on in American politics at the time, and everyone involved here was clearly fully committed to making the film as palpable, powerful and resonant as possible for the viewer, no matter their nationality or political inclination.  Also typical for a Sorkin film, the cast are exceptional, everyone clearly having the wildest time getting their teeth into their finely-drawn characters and that magnificent dialogue – Redmayne and Baron Cohen are compellingly complimentary intellectual antagonists given their radically different approaches and their roles’ polar opposite energies, while Rylance delivers another pitch-perfect, simply ASTOUNDING performance that once again marks him as one of the very best actors of his generation, and there are particularly meaty turns from Strong, Langella, Aquaman’s Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (as besieged Black Panther Bobby Seale) and a potent late appearance from Michael Keaton that sear themselves into the memory long after viewing. Altogether then, this is a phenomenal film which deserves to be seen no matter the format, a thought-provoking and undeniably IMPORTANT masterwork from a master cinematic storyteller that says as much about the world we live in now as the decidedly turbulent times it portrays …

12.  GREYHOUND – when the cinemas closed back in March, the fate of many of the major summer blockbusters we’d been looking forward to was thrown into terrible doubt. Some were pushed back to more amenable dates in the autumn or winter (which even then ultimately proved frustratingly ambitious), others knocked back a whole year to fill summer slots for 2021, but more than a few simply dropped off the radar entirely with the terrible words “postponed until further notice” stamped on them, and I lamented them all, this one in particular.  It hung in there longer than some, stubbornly holding onto its June release slot for as long as possible, but eventually it gave up the ghost too … but thanks to Apple TV+, not for long, ultimately releasing less than a month later than intended.  Thankfully the film itself was worth the fuss, a taut World War II suspense thriller that’s all killer, no filler – set during the infamous Battle of the Atlantic, it portrays the constant life-or-death struggle faced by the Allied warships assigned to escort the transport convoys as they crossed the ocean, defending their charges from German U-boats.  Adapted from C.S. Forester’s famous 1955 novel The Good Shepherd by Tom Hanks and directed by Aaron Schneider (Get Low), the narrative focuses on the crew of the escort leader, American destroyer USS Fletcher, codenamed “Greyhound”, and in particular its captain, Commander Ernest Krause (Hanks), a career sailor serving his first command.  As they cross “the Pit”, the most dangerous middle stretch of the journey where they spend days without air-cover, they find themselves shadowed by “the Wolf Pack”, a particularly cunning group of German submarines that begin to pick away at the convoy’s stragglers.  Faced with daunting odds, a dwindling supply of vital depth-charges and a ruthless, persistent enemy, Krause must make hard choices to bring his ships home safe … jumping into the thick of the action within the first ten minutes and maintaining its tension for the remainder of the trim 90-minute run, this is screen suspense par excellence, a sleek textbook example of how to craft a compelling big screen knuckle-whitener with zero fat and maximum reward, delivering a series of desperate naval scraps packed with hide-and-seek intensity, heart-in-mouth near-misses and fist-in-air cathartic payoffs by the bucket-load.  Hanks is subtly magnificent, the calm centre of the narrative storm as a supposed newcomer to this battle arena who could have been BORN for it, bringing to mind his similarly unflappable in Captain Phillips and certainly not suffering by comparison; by and large he’s the focus point, but other crew members make strong (if sometimes quite brief) impressions, particularly Stephen Graham as Krause’s reliably seasoned XO, Lt. Commander Charlie Cole, The Magnificent Seven’s Manuel Garcia-Rulfo and Just Mercy’s Rob Morgan, while Elisabeth Shue does a lot with a very small part in brief flashbacks as Krause’s fiancée Evelyn. Relentless, exhilarating and thoroughly unforgettable, this was one of the true action highlights of the summer, and one hell of a war flick.  I’m so glad it made the cut for the summer …

11.  PROJECT POWER – with Marvel and DC pushing their tent-pole titles back in the face of COVID, the usual superhero antics we’ve come to expect for the summer were pretty thin on the ground in 2020, leading us to find our geeky fan thrills elsewhere. Unfortunately, pickings were frustratingly slim – Korean comic book actioner Gundala was entertaining but workmanlike, while Thor AU Mortal was underwhelming despite strong direction from Troll Hunter’s André Øvredal, and The New Mutants just got shat on by the studio and its distributors and no mistake – thank the Gods, then, for Netflix, once again riding to the rescue with this enjoyably offbeat super-thriller, which takes an intriguing central premise and really runs with it.  New designer drug Power has hit the streets of New Orleans, able to give anyone who takes it a superpower for five minutes … the only problem is, until you try it, you don’t know what your own unique talent is – for some, it could mean five minutes of invisibility, or insane levels of super-strength, but other powers can be potentially lethal, the really unlucky buggers just blowing up on the spot.  Robin (The Hate U Give’s Dominique Fishback) is a teenage Power-pusher with dreams of becoming a rap star, dealing the pills so she can help her diabetic mum; Frank Shaver (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is one of her customers, a police detective who uses his power of near invulnerability to even the playing field when supercharged crims cause a disturbance.  Their lives are turned upside down when Art (Jamie Foxx) arrives in town – he’s a seriously badass ex-soldier determined to hunt down the source of Power by any means necessary, and he’s not above tearing the Big Easy apart to do it. This is a fun, gleefully infectious rollercoaster that doesn’t take itself too seriously, revelling in the anarchic potential of its premise and crafting some suitably OTT effects-driven chaos brought to pleasingly visceral fruition by its skilfully inventive director, Ariel Schulman (Catfish, Nerve, Viral), while Mattson Tomlin (the screenwriter of the DCEU’s oft-delayed, incendiary headline act The Batman) takes the story in some very interesting directions and poses fascinating questions about what Power’s TRULY capable of.  Gordon-Levitt and Fishback are both brilliant, the latter particularly impressing in what’s sure to be a major breakthrough role for her, and the friendship their characters share is pretty adorable, while Foxx really is a force to be reckoned with, pretty chill even when he’s in deep shit but fully capable of turning into a bona fide killing machine at the flip of a switch, and there’s strong support from Westworld’s Rodrigo Santoro as Biggie, Power’s delightfully oily kingpin, Courtney B. Vance as Frank’s by-the-book superior, Captain Crane, Amy Landecker as Gardner, the morally bankrupt CIA spook responsible for the drug’s production, and Machine Gun Kelly as Newt, a Power dealer whose pyrotechnic “gift” really isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.  Exciting, inventive, frequently amusing and infectiously likeable, this was some of the most uncomplicated cinematic fun I had all summer.  Not bad for something which I’m sure was originally destined to become one of the season’s B-list features …

[seasonsgredence]

Colin Farrell on life and parenting in a time of COVID

How much has fatherhood changed you?

It changed me. I mean it changes me every day. I don’t know what I am doing most of the time, slash all of the time. But I adore my boys, I love them very much. And I just hope I am not f****** them up too much to be honest with you.

I think if all of us can be a little, can f*** our children up a little less than maybe we were f***** up by our parents, if that can be the bar for success, when then eventually we will continue to move in the right direction, the direction of healing and the ability to self-govern with kindness and decency and consideration.

But yeah, my kids are masters. With the love I have for them and the concerns that I have for them and the hopes that I am treating them decently, they bring up a lot of stuff, a lot of fear and a lot of self-judgment, because it’s by far the most important thing of course that I have in my life.

This whole acting and stuff and movies, don’t get me wrong, I get meaning. I am one of the fortunate people on this earth who gets a certain amount of meaning from my work and self-indulgently I get off on what I do sometimes and even when I am uncomfortable in it, it has meaning for me.

But being a dad to those two boys is by a long shot the most difficult and the most rewarding and the most meaningful and the most consequential thing that I will ever do. And time is going fast. It’s moving quickly. I don’t know about you, do you find yourself going back into old photos and videos through your phone at this time? Do you find yourself being nostalgic, I would imagine a lot of us are. Yeah, I have done that a lot in my bed, like three o’clock last night and this morning in bed I was looking over videos of both of my boys when they were four and eight and now they are ten and sixteen and it’s just all going so quickly.

So as I said, in the vacuum that I have been fortunate enough to live in — which is the vacuum that involves a home, a fridge and freezer full of food, and a few dollars in the bank and everyone in my life that is very close to me healthy — I have found this an incredibly rewarding time because it has allowed me and family to spend time together that we wouldn’t have had if I was still in London shooting “Batman.”

Having said that, of course I would give that up readily, the time I have had, that gift, I would give it up for all the lives that had been lost to be back on the planet and for people not to have experienced the degree of pain. But we have been dealing with what we have been dealt.  And it’s an incredibly difficult time and an incredibly complicated time with struggle and pain and loss, but I would hope those of us who can really just move forward with a greater degree of patience and a greater degree of consideration for each other.

What do you most about normal life these days?

One thing I noticed in the first, because I came back from London, I was doing something there, and I came back and went straight into two weeks here. And I was two weeks alone in this house. I don’t have a partner, my two children were with their moms.  And so I was alone here for two weeks.

And I just remember after about nine or 10 days, feeling the absence of touch in my life. And that was the most significant moment I had in relation to the awareness of something that was lacking that I was very used to having, just touch.

And I literally mean handshake with the barista in the coffee shop down the road, a hug with a friend, a high five, knuckle bump, whatever it may be, I had had, and it’s only 10 days. But because of the degree of enforcement or the degree of imposition, like this has been imposed upon everyone and none of us have had a choice, solitude is not as chosen for those who are living in solitude now as it may be. It’s something that is an affliction.

So because of that, my point being, I have probably gone a week before in my life without touching anyone, perhaps, maybe not, but because of what was happening in the world and because of my awareness of why I was living without touch. It became something very extreme and something that I felt that I was really missing and really lacking.  And just, what does touch represent? It just represents tenderness, it represents human interaction and it represents a sense of community.

And so that was the thing that I missed and I just realized how grateful I am and I would like to hold onto it as much as I can and how grateful I am to be able to go down to the shop and get a coffee. And the idea of going to a cinema, and I know there are bigger things at play with the world, but the idea of actually going to a movie theater, standing in line at the concessions and getting popcorn and a soft drink with my kids or a friend or on my own — It’s like another world that I can’t even, just the idea of it, there are so many simple banal things that we get to experience in our lives every day that we don’t, as often happens, the lack of having them exposes the magic or the worth that they provide us.

But touch definitely is something that I miss; being able to shake a hand or give a friend a hug, just that. And that is why I imagine, I have friends who are older than me that have mothers and fathers who are way up in years who haven’t been able to see their mothers or fathers and haven’t been able to touch them and have waved through windows and that’s been heartbreaking to see.  And we’ve seen those images all over the internet and it’s been a very tricky time for so many.

What did you learn about yourself during this period of reflection?

Yeah, that I can be, I don’t think I learned this, I think I probably knew this, but I can be grumpy blech, but I probably maybe possibly, one hundred percent, identify my worth with external things in my life more than I would like to.

I find that because the routine or the work that I had done or was doing, all that has been taken from my life, has allowed me to identify how much I see my worth with acting or with doing, with being active. And now, you see it online. Everyone is trying to figure out what to do. Somebody is learning a new language. Somebody is picking up an instrument. Some people are doing this, that or the other. Some people can’t get out of bed. Some people are eating too much. Some people are exercising loads.

I find myself having to lean into just my thoughts, my imaginations, my fears again, hopes, all these things that I have used life to distract myself at times, not all the time. But the busyness of life that I have used at time, understandably as we all do, to distract myself from other kind of internal agitations, those internal agitations have had a chance to come rearing to the fore.

And yeah, like many people, if I am not doing, doing, doing, I find it hard to sit in the consideration that my life has worth. And of course it does and I believe everyone’s life, just by virtue of having breath in the body, everyone’s life has worth, human life has worth, animal life has worth, planet life has worth, life has worth.

But sometimes with this kind of at times toxic awareness that we have, toxic consciousness that at times we have, that is so kind of imbued with an ability to judge the self harshly, sometimes we do and sometimes I lean into the “external forces” as markers for my own self-worth.

And these are things that can be taken away from you anytime, so my worth is reliant on those things. My worth is reliant on delusion or those which can be removed from my existence at any moment. So by not getting work again and say that it all goes away tomorrow, then I am going to be like shit, I have no worth, and that’s not, I don’t even believe that and a relationship with myself feels like that might be true.

Can you talk about how it felt getting into the Penguin costume in “The Batman” movie?

It’s all exciting. To be a part of that universe and just there are certain words that are part of my internal lexicon: Gotham City, Penguin, Joker, Batman, Bruce Wayne, Harvey Dent, all these things.

Tim Burton’s Batman was kind of my, no, I watched the Adam West TV show growing up actually as well. So Batman as a kid, yes very much, not in comic book form but the TV show I watched ardently when I was a child.  And then in my teens I saw Burton’s version and loved it.

And then obviously I was a huge fan of what Chris Nolan did with that world and how he brought it back to life and gave it an immediacy and a contemporary significance.  So just to be part of, again that folklore, that mythology, is again really cool.

I had only started it and I can’t wait to get back. The creation of it, the aesthetic of the character, has been fun and I really am so excited to get back and explore it. And I haven’t got that much to do. I have a certain amount in the film. I am not all over it by any means. But there are a couple of some tasty scenes I have in it and my creation and I can’t wait to get back. Yeah, I totally feel like it is something that I have not had the opportunity to explore before. It feels original and fun. But I am only at the start of the journey so I can’t wait to get back and really get into it.

[x]

[my2021infilm]

23. The Gentlemen (2019)

The Gentlemen is another Guy Ritchie gangster film. I won’t lie, I don’t love them all. Rock n Rolla (probably spelt that wrong to how it was marketed, who cares) wasn’t great but Snatch, Lock Stock and The Gentlemen were all brilliant. The Gentlemen probably being the weakest, in fact I would say I have listed them above in the order of quality with Rock n Rolla being accidentally before the rest.

This one stars Matthew McConaughey as a big time drug kingpin, with Charlie Dunham as his right hand man, I hope to god he was meant to be Geordie because his accent seems to be all over the place. Hugh Grant plays a really sexually forward gay journalist, it worked really well. Henry Golding played one of the villains of the movie who had a good gangster name that is escaping me as well as a guy who i’ve never seen in a film before. We also had Colin Farrell as coach who was hilarious and lastly as far as i’m aware we had Grime MC Bugzy Malone who was one of the gym members of Coach’s gym, he had a few seasons in the film and was funny. He didn’t stand out in a good way, meaning that people who didn’t know him would assume he was an actor because his performance was very professional, not like most times a musician acts in a film and you can tell they aren’t an actor.

Overall this is a very Guy Ritchie film, lots of characters in a film with lots of twists and turns that result in these characters all coming together in one big story when at the start of the film they had no ties to each other. How he does that so seamlessly I will never know. I suppose that’s why he’s a millionaire off of writing and directing films and i’m a film graduate with nothing to show for it. Now i’m gonna go cry in a corner.  

[wahbegan]

The Batman trailer

The victim’s name is Don i guess nyehehe and yeah speculation is he’s the Mayor

I haven’t seen any trailer breakdowns that mention this but apart from wrapping the victim’s face in duct tape, his hands appear to have been encased in bricks as well. I can’t fathom why, but I imagine it’s symbolic in some way.

Yeah the cipher on the card does spell out HE LIES STILL as evidenced by the symbols for L, I, E, and S all repeating ha weird wonder if that was on purpose wouldn’t put it past Eddie i mean…….you know how he is.

Yeah so obviously there’s some huge web of corruption Riddler wants uncovered, and rather than just…y’know, telling people, he’s doing this whole murder-Riddle-zodiac killer schtick thing, because, to quote Arkham City: “Why doesn’t he just tell you what he wants?” “Because he’s insane.”

Oh yeah so the cops by this point clearly work with Batman, particularly Gordon, but the rest of the Gotham PD and the FBI guys are clearly kind of awed and unnerved by his presence

Okay it COULD just be a lens flare, and I COULD be wrong, but it looks like Eddie set up a tripwire across the murder scene? Probably reveals a clue, I doubt it’s gonna blow the apartment

Batman watching a press conference about the Mayor’s death incognito (read: in a motorcycle helmet and Winter Soldier make-up), seemingly given by who i think plays the current Police Commissioner, who does a great job looking like a real sleazy piece of shit with a single-second shot of his face, i’m sure he’s exposed by Riddler and/or murdered as well

Oh I heard a rumor about the “Batcave” being an abandoned/disused transit station accessible by Wayne Manor, that looks to be what Robbat Battinbat’s riding his motorcycle into here

Riddler CRASHes ha classic the Mayor if that’s who it is’ funeral with a car with DOA written all over it and flowers and a civilian with a ringing phone duct taped to his hands and a bomb around his neck in a VERY “Joker in The Dark Knight” kind of way

Catwoman’s breaking into a safe in the murder scene for some reason, she might be working for someone or trying to uncover something but either way didn’t notice that the first time, doesn’t just look like it’s a random robbery

COLIN FARRELL?!?!?!?!

Yeah Batman apparently it takes the entire police department and Gordon to stop him fucking someone up in an interrogation room lmao

I love Catwoman’s little ears d’aw

I guess whatever the funeral riddle is, Batman doesn’t get the answer right cause he gets blown the fuck up

Now these mooks in the grease paint I don’t think are actually Joker mooks cause some look Joker-esque but one only has half his face done up, one has a really noticeable inverted cross thing going on, they may be garden variety juggalos or some kind of rogues gallery idolizing gang i do not know. One looks like Art the Clown from Terrifier

Oh yeah this Batman, in case the hair and the facial expression like he’s constantly about to snap and beat the living dog shit out of the nearest human being didn't clue you in, is clearly a bit fucking unhinged based on the way he just gOES ON when he’s taking down the one who’s dumb enough to attack him lmao Penguin seems genuinely terrified of how unhinged he is

Yeah cops are shooting at him so something clearly happens to put him and the cops at odds which i mean isn’t really surprising doesn’t it always? They punch for a bit and then they’re mates.

It seems like…so like I said in another post, Riddler seems very Hush-inspired in this, and of course spoilers but the crux of that story is that Riddler figured out who Batman is and orchestrates this entire massive plot including this new villain Hush and yeah anyway, based on this last line and the way he’s specifically coming after Batman, i think he does know who Batman is and the Wayne family is somehow involved in whatever BIG SECRET he’s trying to reveal. I’m a little sad about this because like look I get it, it’s the zeitgeist, I really don’t like this recent trend of making Batman’s parents/at least his dad a TREMENDOUS ASSHOLE before they died it just ugh

I also hope it doesn’t make their murder something important because it kinda undermines the whole theme of y’know why he became Batman and decided to fight crime, not just cause his parents were killed but specifically because they were killed in a completely senseless crime by just some nobody for no reason but anyway now i’m just rambling so that’s all i’ve got for now

Eddie wants to look menacing but he can’t see without his glasses the fucking dork…stop trying to make Green Zodiac Chic happen, Eddie! It’s not going to happen!

[typinggently]

While scrolling through the tag I’ve seen your post about the casting choices for The Batman , where you said you hope they won’t downplay the costumes (particularly the riddlers) and now I’m curious what your opinion on them is now that we’ve seen a trailer? Cause on the one hand it’s clearly not the classic costumes but on the other ‚riddler and catwoman but they’re on a budget‘ is kind of. A choice.

Sweetheart! Thank you for your question!! Honestly, I’m just buzzing about this whole topic and it was a delight to sit down and force myself to put my thoughts into words.

I have to admit that I usually avoid trailers because I always fear that they’ll give away the scenes and I won’t be as excited when the film rolls around but this time I simply couldn’t help myself, I had to watch it 🦇♥️ Also I get super swept up in the action when it comes to those things. Things go “boom” and “flash” and I go “ahh” and “wow”, I’m very easy. Didn’t even recognise Colin Farrell.

But all that aside - I rewatched it just now and Catwoman definitely looks great. The whole “I hope they keep the costumes from the comics” concept doesn’t really apply to female characters in the same way, anyways, I just thought to myself after revisiting that thought. Their original costumes are usually just sexualising, sometimes to a ridiculous degree. I have no problme with that being toned down a little for a more “realistic” feel. (And since catwoman’s costume isn’t particularly flashy and kitschy to begin with, I feel like it’s rather easy to not miss the mark completely, if that makes sense?)

But with men, there’s this whole “we can’t have any fun” vibe. Or, alternatively, “we can only do the joker”. (By the way? I actually really liked how completely off the shits the L*to-Joker costumes were. That was so fun imo, it was completely ridiculous.)

Regarding Riddler - I mean, I do get that they’re going for a more “realistic” look but I have to say, I feel like it might work really nicely. I’m still sad we apparently don’t get any green :( But also, I could imagine that they have to avoid the Joker-isms, and thus decided to go for a look (and maybe a general vibe) that isn’t as clowny-hysterical. Thus no skintight suits and big questionmarks. I didn’t really consider that when I made that first post, I think. And also - they do probably feel the need to set themselves apart from the Jim Carrey Riddler, too. So it all makes sense from a costumee director’s standpoint, I completely get it. And from the little hints we did see, we might not have lost all of the funkiness. I love his handwriting. I love the card.

In the end, I feel like it all comes down to vibes. How well composed is the universe, how do the different elements fit together. Which sounds so abstract but basically, I just judge things by how exciting the world they present is. And in this context, I do like his costume, because it has such a gothic, pseudo-realistic vibe to it? It’s the same with Bruce (I could scream) - the eyeliner?? But also - the cape really did it for me to be honest. It seems to be light fabric, which for some reason has me out of my mind. The contrast of his chunky boots and the light fluttery, useless cape has the same vibe to me as Riddler’s “realistic” get up with the coat and gloves topped off with? is he wearing those diver’s goggles?! what is that? Realism but make it slightly grimy and off the shits?! I have to say I could definitely get excited for it. Rip to my dreams of funky green outfits, but if this is a Noir Batman (in contrast to, like, the polished-functional, high-tech Nolan Batman), I could 100% get excited about it. Which is to say, I’m already excited.

Also can I just say that Mr Little Miss Sunshine seems to be so nice for that role? I’m really buying it, just based on the trailer. I’m excited for it, his voice is so nice.

Really, now I’m even more excited? Who knows what the actual film will be like, but I’m 100% willing to just let it do its thing and give it a chance. Let it play out as a spectacle, that’s all it really is in the end <3 🦇

(also please feel free to tell me what you think!!!! I'm always scared I'll soundlike an instagram influencer begging for engagement by asking questions but I’m genuinely curious <3)

[that-shamrock-vibe]

Movie Review: The Gentlemen (Spoilers)

Disclaimer: Alright so I am posting this review over a month after it is released in the U.K, but if you still haven’t yet seen the movie there will be some degree of spoilers.

General Reaction:

I had a surprisingly good time watching The Gentlemen, more so than I thought possible from what is, on the surface, a typical gangster movie.

This is because writer and director Guy Ritchie is in his element with these types of movies as he manages to inject enough mystery and interest along with one or two topical conversations, to keep his fans who want another Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels happy.

Now do I feel this as good as Lock Stock? In my opinion yes, as it combines the best elements of that mystery/crime movie with its sequel Snatch.

In terms of how the main plot of the movie plays out on paper, you would think this as just another gangster movie. But when you add the narrative of telling most of the story through flashbacks as a story told by Hugh Grant’s Fletcher to Charlie Hunam's Raymond, coupled with a very sweet hustler twist at the very end that screams for a sequel, and this makes for a great start to my 2020 movie screenings.

But of course, it is rare to have a perfect movie, and this movie is definitely not perfect. However while other movies stumble over scripting when trying to make the outlandish grounded, every over the top instance that happens in this movie, with one exception, is played for laughs and treated as the status quo within the world this movie inhabits.

The social and political commentary on how legalising marijuana is an inevitability and how Ritchie compares it to U.S. Prohibition is not only ingenious when you think about the two situations but also compelling as a business pitch by Matthew McConaughey’s Mickey to make both Jeremy Strong’s Berger and the audience think of the pros and cons to the trade that could one day, potentially soon, become a reality.

Also, after Ritchie nailed the representation mark in Aladdin last year casting racially-appropriate actors for the Arabian setting, it is interesting to see him try with other areas of representation. Here it is the LGBTQ+ and Asian communities, and they are handled in typical Guy Ritchie gangster fashion, but, as an gay man myself, Grant’s Fletcher is so grounded and realistic as a cheeky older gay man whose sexuality is never at the front of the movie and he could just be a flirt, that it simply comes off as charming.

The Asian community may not feel the same about how they are villafied here but there are also a couple of black characters one of whom, who is part of Colin Farrell’s Coach’s “Boys”, is dealt what he believes to be an offensive slur based on his race however Coach points out that the guy was simply stating facts and it’s a sign of respect.

I don’t feel anything in this movie should be taken as an offensive commentary and should be laughed off essentially as clearly the movie means no harm. Even women, who draw the short straw only having one main character to represent them, are done justice here.

Cast:

My three MVPs in this movie are Colin Farrell, Charlie Hunnam and Hugh Grant.

I love Colin Farrell in anything I see him in, I keep saying he is an underrated actor as no one seems to acknowledge how good he is. He was so funny here and echoed Brad Pitt’s character in Snatch particularly with the focus on his Irish nature. He just stole every scene he was in for me.

Charlie Hunnam, interestingly enough, I have not seen in a role since Queer as Folk. I do know he has broken Hollywood and has been in a lot of film and television but nothing he has been in has caught my interest. Here though, as McConaughey’s right-hand man, he is brilliant. I in fact see a lot of similarities between him and Jude Law in their acting styles.

Hugh Grant is another actor I don’t really focus on but when I do see him he’s great. Again, I took no offence in his portrayal of a gay man and genuinely found him believable as someone I would meet in my local.

Matthew McConaughey was good, but again he’s an actor I have never really paid attention to in the past and unlike Hugh Grant he didn’t grab my attention.

Michelle Dockery on the other hand did it for the women being the only actress in the main cast. There were many times in this movie where she reminded me of Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter and gave me new appreciation for her work on Downton Abbey.

The others were good, but like McConaughey, either didn’t leave an impression or make an impression depending on if I knew them or not. Not to say they were bad but they weren’t great either.

Recommendation:

If you are a fan of Guy Ritchie gangster movies you will love this movie, if you are a fan of Lock Stock and want to see it in modern day you will love this movie.

What this movie made me think about is the fact that you have this movie taking place in modern day, Lock Stock was late 90s and the Peaky Blinders were early 1900s. Considering the latter were real-world and the former two are so realistic they could be real world, if Ritchie somehow found a way to combine all three properties, it would make for an epic sequel.

Speaking of a sequel, because as I said earlier this movie screams out for one, if they want to add to this movie’s impressive cast my top suggestions are Idris Elba, Tom Hardy and Jason Statham.

Overall I rate this movie a solid 8/10, it is a highly offensive movie but much like Deadpool one done purely with love,

So that’s my review for The Gentlemen, what did you guys think? Post your comments and check out more Movie Reviews as well as other posts.

[in-flagrante]

ALL CHANGE With Michelle Dockery

Best known as Downton Abbey’s indelible Lady Mary, MICHELLE DOCKERY effortlessly transitions from haughty aristocrat to corrupt cockney in Guy Ritchie’s new gangster movie, The Gentlemen. LAURA CRAIK talks to the British star about her working-class roots, embracing a golden age of opportunities for female actors and why working with Ritchie, Matthew McConaughey, Hugh Grant and her idol Jeremy Strong was a dream come true

Michelle Dockery is about as different from Downton Abbey’s Lady Mary as is imaginable. Dressed in Totême boyfriend jeans, white Adidas trainers and a black cashmere turtleneck, she is warm, effusive and quick to laugh where Lady Mary is frosty and composed, and she has an accent not dissimilar to Victoria Beckham’s. “It may come as a bit of a shock to everyone when I open my mouth in the film,” she smiles.

“The film” is The Gentlemen, a classic gangster caper written and directed by Guy Ritchie in a return to the genre that first made him famous. “Charlie [Hunnan, one of Dockery’s co-stars] is calling The Gentlemen ‘vintage Ritchie’, and I think that’s right,” she says of the British director behind Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. “I play Rosalind, who is the wife of Matthew McConaughey’s character, Mickey,” Dockery explains. “He has these marijuana farms that are growing underneath stately homes, hence the title The Gentlemen.”

Marijuana farms? What would Carson say? Dockery laughs. After six years playing Lady Mary Crawley in Downton Abbey– first in the well-loved TV series (which has won 15 Emmys and been watched by an estimated 270m people worldwide) and latterly in the movie – her role in The Gentlemen was a great departure for the 38-year-old British actress. “Rosalind runs a car dealership, which she’s inherited through her family. She’s a real, tough, east-London girl. I grew up in Essex, and my family has a sort of east-London background, so it was great to step into that world.”

To say the cast of The Gentlemen is “stellar” is an understatement: in addition to Dockery, McConaughey and Hunnam, the movie stars Hugh Grant (who plays equally against type and appears as a corrupt and predatory reporter), Colin Farrell, Henry Golding, and Jeremy Strong, most recently seen as the troubled Kendall Roy in HBO’s Succession – of which Dockery is a huge fan. “I mean, this whole interview could be about Succession,” she laughs. “It’s absolutely brilliant, the best thing on TV. Every single character is Shakespearean. I loved working with Jeremy. We only had one scene together, a dinner-party scene, and I would never have seen his character the way he played it. He was a joy to watch, and worlds away from Kendall.”

Working with Ritchie – and the laugh-a-minute, largely male cast – was, Dockery says, a dream. “There’s one scene where I arrive at my garage, and Guy wanted to add a bit of dialogue, just off the cuff. I had to be on my toes, and I really enjoyed that. So often, when I’m working, the process is very much word for word, and on this film it was malleable. It was liberating.” She also relished collaborating with Ritchie on Rosalind’s look. “Even though Rosalind works in a garage, I get to wear the most beautiful Balmain jumpsuit, and the first scene is me walking into the garage in a pair of Louboutins, which is hilarious. Rosalind has clearly worked her way up to where she is, really enjoys the lifestyle and having money, but still wants to work. I love that about her character, that she still gets her hands dirty.”

Dockery says she is happy with the quality of roles she has been offered in her career (she graduated from London’s Guildhall School of Music & Drama in 2004), while being aware that, in the past, female actors have lamented the paucity of fully rounded female characters. “I do feel I stepped into this industry at a time when things were really beginning to change, especially for women. It’s the golden age of television, where creators have the luxury of writing 10 hours as opposed to just two, so there’s room to explore a character in greater depth. It’s now becoming much more normal to start a job or to read a part and for me to have a dialogue with the creators – if there are moments where it’s felt the female character is not involved, for example – whereas I guess in the past, it would have felt like more of a fight.”

Does she have any aspirations to write or direct herself? She laughs. “I do think about, you know, doing other things. Right now, I’m not sure exactly what, but…” she tails off, laughing. The glint in her eye suggests she has something in the pipeline

After a six-month stint in Boston, where she was filming Defending Jacob, a harrowing miniseries about a family whose lives are torn apart after the death of a boy at their son’s school (“it’s not a comedy,” she notes wryly), she is very much enjoying being home in north London, where she lives close to her two sisters (Dockery is the youngest of three). “It’s a cozy time of year to be home,” she smiles, nursing a cup of tea. “It’s great catching up with friends and family – and, because I travel a lot for work, every time I come back to London, I appreciate it much more. Recently a friend came over from LA and we went to the Antony Gormley exhibition. It took my breath away.”

Can she walk around London fairly anonymously? “Yes, more so here than in America. But that’s the thing with our culture. Brits are too cool to approach you, but in America people have more confidence to come over and say something. It still takes me very much by surprise, but it goes in waves. When the Downton film came out, it peaked again.”

She laughs as she explains that she can never tell who’s going to be a Downton fan. “I got into a cab a little while ago, and the driver was this big, burly Guy Ritchie type. ‘Where you going, love?’ he said. And then it went a bit quiet. And then he was like, ‘You alright?’ And I was like, ‘Yeah, yeah,’ and told him about my day. And he suddenly went, ‘Shame about your sister in season 3.’ And I just laughed out loud. People really surprise me sometimes.”

Would she say she’s an introvert or an extrovert? “I’m an introvert.” Although not the stay-at-home type. “I do like to go out and dance. For me, it’s not a night out unless I’m on the dance floor. Every couple of months, I just need to dance; have one of those… dance-y nights.”

Her interest in fashion is modest rather than craven. “I love clothes but can be ignorant of certain designers. I like supporting young ones coming up.” She’s also what she calls “a coat girl”, with more coats than shoes. But her most cherished possession is a St Christopher necklace her mom gave her. “It comes everywhere with me. I’ve had it for 15 or 20 years.” She recently started donating her old clothes to Smart Works, a British charity of which the Duchess of Sussex is a patron, which helps unemployed women get back to work. “They’ve got all my skinny jeans.”

Our time being almost over, I finish with the question few subjects want to answer. Is she in love at the moment? She laughs and draws an imaginary zip across her mouth. The line of enquiry is especially sensitive as Dockery’s fiancé, Irishman John Dineen, passed away in 2015. She is now rumored to be dating Jasper Waller-Bridge, brother of the feted Phoebe, creator of Fleabag and Killing Eve. If this is true, perhaps we’ll see her in a comedy soon? “There are things on the back burner, but I can’t say,” she says. Then, in a quick flash of Lady Mary, she concludes with a polite, “Thank you so much. It’s been really lovely.”

The Gentlemen is released on January 1, 2020

[mst3kproject]

1107: The Land that Time Forgot

Watching the opening credits of this actually made me do a double-take – the name Colin Farrell appeared on the screen and I was like, wait, what the fuck?  Wouldn’t he have been like two years old?  Well, I looked it up and learned that I was wrong: The Land that Time Forgot was made in 1975, and the Colin Farrell I was thinking of wasn’t even born until a year later.  At least that woke me up.

It’s World War I, and a passenger ship is torpedoed by a German submarine.  The only survivors are a few sailors, Doug McClure, and a Dr. Lisa Clayton who serves as the movie’s designated pretty girl.  The nearest thing to rescue in sight is the submarine itself when it surfaces a few hours later – so they climb aboard, storm the hatch, and take over the ship.  At first it seems that all they have to do now is head for home, but they soon learn that the Germans have sabotaged the compass.  They’ve come ashore instead at the mysterious lost continent of Caprona. Naturally this is a land of cavemen and dinosaurs, and in order to escape the British and the Germans must put aside their differences and work together.  Only then will they be able to get back to the real world and resume shooting at each other.

While At the Earth’s Core comes across as a movie nobody gave a much of a shit about, there are places where The Land that Time Forgot is surprisingly artful and well-made.  In particular the first half-hour has several very nice moments in it, especially in the way it uses sound.  After the opening credits, the music totally vanishes for a third of the film.  The only background sounds are the lapping of waves and the creaking of the submarine, which makes gunshots and explosions all the more jarring when they happen.  It also makes this part of the movie seem very grounded and real, which contrasts with the more fantastical stuff that happens in Caprona.  The first sight of the Capronan cliffs is accompanied by the return of the soundtrack, which ushers us out of this more real world and into the fantasy beyond.

I feel like if Amicus had just set out to make a suspense movie about WWI submarines, a sort of early-20th-century Balance of Terror, they could have done a pretty fair job.  Several scenes, such as when the characters are all sitting in the dinghy waiting for the sub to surface, or when they’re diving to escape the British ship firing on them and aren’t sure if the hull will hold, are very effective indeed. The interior of the sub is an appropriately creepy and claustrophobic place, and details like the slight swinging of the lamp in the captain’s office remind us that we’re at sea.  The miniature sub surfacing, with water pouring off it, looks lovely.  The giant squid that passes by them un-noticed in the dark is my favourite ‘creature’ moment.

Unfortunately, there’s also stuff that sucks.  What ought to be the ‘action’ sequences are just a bunch of guys in very similar jackets and sweaters punching each other in the fog, and you can’t tell who’s who or which side is winning.  The conversation between the captain and Dr. Clayton attempts to make the point that when your country’s at war it’s impossible to ‘stay out of it’ no matter how much of a pacifist you, personally, may be, but it’s too heavy-handed to work properly… though I do like how the two of them are able to bond over a shared interest in biology.  I have no idea what happened in the tunnel that damaged the submarine, because the exterior shots are just blackness with a few rocks.

Then we hit the dinosaurs.  These are honestly fairly impressive for the time the film was made.  We don’t get a good first impression, as the first ones we get a good look at are three completely stiff pterodactyls circling like they’re hanging from a baby’s mobile.  The rest are puppets, stop motion, and animatronics, and the people who decided which technique to use for which shot had a good grasp of what each is best at.  The greenscreen work is sometimes crummy but there are some lovely matte paintings, and for the most part the effects here are good enough to tell the story without being distracting.  There’s even some attempt to portray the dinosaurs as animals with behaviours, rather than monsters that exist only to menace the humans.

So I actually have quite a bit of praise for this movie.  That’s not what my blog is about, though.  This blog is about movies that suck, so let’s look at the bad parts of The Land that Time Forgot.

Well, there’s the standard stuff.  The day-for-night is bright enough that it was obviously shot in the daytime while still being dark enough that you can’t tell what’s going on. The human inhabitants of Caprona are stupid cartoon Neanderthals with dark makeup on their faces but not their arms and legs, who become whiter and whiter as they move up the evolutionary scale. The motion of the dinosaurs may be pretty good but the design of them is ugly and lumpy, with far too many teeth even on the herbivores.  This is partly because we didn’t know nearly as much about dinosaurs in the seventies, but the movie’s fat carnosaurs with their lizard-like heads would have been ugly and inaccurate in the thirties.  Compare them, for example, to Charles R. Knight’s Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops from freaking 1927.

Many ‘lost world’ scenarios will simply present us with t-rex fighting a saber-toothed tiger and expect us not to question it.  The Land that Time Forgot gives us an reason of sorts for its mixing of geological eras, but not one that makes any sense.  From Om’s conviction that he will become a ‘Stolu’ and Dr. Clayton’s explanation of what’s going on in the giant coconut hot tub, we gather that each individual organism on Caprona evolves from a single cell to a complex being, following the entire history of its species’ evolution.  This appears to have been inspired by the fact that embryos ‘evolve’ as they develop, going through phases in which they have things like gills before losing them.  The phenomenon, called 'recapitulation', was considered one of the original pieces of evidence for evolution and I guess I can accept how they use it here.  The problem is that the movie refuses to state it clearly, which gives the impression that the writers were kind of embarrassed by the idea.

The biggest problem with two-thirds of The Land that Time Forgot is that once the characters reach Caprona, the story more or less comes to a screeching halt.  The parts set on the submarine were quite tightly-focused.  Now we are technically still seeing the same story, as they try to find fuel in order to get them back to civilization, but we also stop for long sequences of people climbing hills and dinosaurs wandering around in the dark, or pointless arguments between the British and German sailors.  In a dinosaur movie we obviously need a little bit of people standing around going oooooh and aaaaah, but they go about it all wrong here.

Then there’s the ending, which quite literally destroys everything we’ve seen so far.  The characters are on the verge of saving the damsel in distress, escaping the island, and celebrating the power of international cooperation, and then at the last minute the volcano erupts and it all goes to hell.  A volcano erupting at the end of a movie that is not about a volcano erupting will always be a deus ex machina, because there’s nothing characters can do to cause or prevent it – it’s never anything but a coincidence.  The need to escape prompts the Germans to turn on the British and try to leave without Dr. Clayton and Doug McClure, and their karmic punishment is to be cooked to death by volcanic gases in their own submarine.  Clayton and McClure are left behind on the shore while everything around them catches fire. This doesn’t feel like a conclusion to the story we’ve just seen.  It feels more like somebody just really hates happy endings, and ripped one out from under us at the last moment.

There are a few things in this movie that could have counted as thematic material if anyone had cared, but nothing is ever done with any of them. Om is a ‘bolu’, a lower order of cavemen, and he never seems to notice Dr. Clayton, nor do the slightly higher ‘stolu’.  It is the ‘golu’, the most human-like of them all, who attempt to kidnap and rape her. I doubt this was an attempt to say anything about human nature.  It seems to have been done that way just because it wasn’t yet time for Dr. Clayton to be in peril until the climax of the film.

Likewise, Jonah and the bots comment on the fact that this is a movie about Europeans coming to a new country, shooting the inhabitants, and generally making a mess as they search for petroleum.  Within the story this is not a colonial urge, as the characters have no plans to settle, but a matter of life and death, and again it seems like nobody thought very deeply about it.  It was just a thing that needed to happen to make the plot work.

Enough went right in this movie that the things which went wrong really do become a terrible shame.  A great deal of effort seems to have gone into just about everything, but a few poor writing choices mean that the result is not very good, yet not bad enough to be enjoyed on that level either.  If I were contemplating this as a potential Episode that Never Was, I honestly think I would have decided against it.  It just doesn’t have the kind of personality I associate with a good MST3K movie.

[timeisthewound]

Mick Mars MSN Chat Transcript

01-feb-2005 DishDiva says: Mick, welcome to MSN Live! Mick_Mars_Live says: Hi. DishDiva says: It's great to have you here for the first time! Christi4618 in Onstage_1 asks: What's is the feeling you get when you perform live. P.S. YOU ROCK SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Mick_Mars_Live says: Thank you, the feeling I get is I go into a whole different world. Very euphoric. Dave_sth in Onstage_1 asks: Hey Mick,, Do you still have your Mirror Guitar and the Theater Of Pain Guitar?? They were awesome!! - Watton, Guadalajara Vincevixen in Onstage_1 asks: Are you ever going to write your own Biography, Diane Ontario, Canada. Love you forever. Mick_Mars_Live says: I don't have the mirror guitar anymore but I do have the Theatre of Pain guitar, I keep my guitars in the studio, they don't go on tour. Mick_Mars_Live says: Thank you for loving me, I need love right now. I am thinking about it, but you never know. motleycruefan88 in Onstage_1 asks: Hey Mick im a new Crue fan and im 16. Is there anything you can tell me about the new tour, what to expect? Mick_Mars_Live says: It's gonna be really crazy, over the top, Circus de Soleil, it's going to be loud and nothing you've ever seen. I promise. DishDiva says: What are you doing to prepare for the show? Mick_Mars_Live says: I'm learning songs I haven't played in 20 years. We're rehearsing and getting the show together and the costumes and acrobats and fire breathers together. That kind of stuff. Newtattoo222 in Onstage_1 asks: Which of your guitars means most to you and why? Mick_Mars_Live says: All of them mean something to me so that's a tough one to pin down. It's like girlfriends and past girlfriends and past wives. That's a tough question to answer my favorite right now Fender built me two Stratocasters and there's a black and a white one. marschick69 in Onstage_1 asks: Do you have rituals before a show? tommi from ok Mick_Mars_Live says: No, not really. I just play my guitar before to limber up my fingers, there's no meditation. I do sacrifice women though. (laughs) CrueCi_Fied in Onstage_1 asks: Hey Mick, what do you do to prepare yourself for being on the road for so long? Scott - Edmonton Mick_Mars_Live says: Some things you just do. It's what I do, it's what I love to do. I'm sure that you have a job, how do you get up every day. It's the same for me, it's what I love to do. It's my gig. punkett527641 in Onstage_1 asks: Are you glad to be back with the guys preforming again? Mick_Mars_Live says: Of course. The four of us, it's crazy when you have to go on. I call it more of a separation than a breakup, so it's all good. Shout1985 in Onstage_1 asks: Mick, what's your favorite Crue song? - Atlanta, Ga. Mick_Mars_Live says: Hmmm. To play or listen to? To play would be "Primal Scream." MentallyTwistedWolf in Onstage_1 asks: Hi Mick Been Waiting over 20 years to see you live! Are you gonna make it to Indy or Louisville before my twisted mind goes on permanent hiatus? Mick_Mars_Live says: Oh yeah! We'll be there. I think we'll be there in February. I believe. Moonstarchic2004 in Onstage_1 asks: Hi Mick, What got u into the music world, I have been a fan for a long time I will be going to my first Crue concert at Mci center in D.C. I cant wait. Luv Ya Mick_Mars_Live says: When I was 3 years old I went to a 4H fair and there was a country western band player, Skeeter Bond was playing and he came out with his big bright orange Stetson. I knew  inmediately what I wanted to do! crue887 in Onstage_1 asks: Whats up with that 20 minute solo? i read about it in an interview with nikki. - Craig, MA Mick_Mars_Live says: What 20 minute solo? I don't know if I know 20 minutes on the guitar. (laughs) Texangirl_21 in Onstage_1 asks: If you weren't in a rock band, what would you be doing? Amarillo, Tx Mick_Mars_Live says: Strippin'! (laughs) Newtattoo222 in Onstage_1 asks: Who would you like to play you in the movie of 'The Dirt' Mick_Mars_Live says: Colin Farrell because he's better looking than me. Paulyc75 in Onstage_1 asks: I'm so psyched!! I had to hide my 'Theatre of Pain' tape from my mother oh so many years ago!! Now I can't wait to take my pregnant wife to see the Crue!! Mick_Mars_Live says: Very cool. I'm flattered, thank you. Jamespain0 in Onstage_1 asks: With only 2 weeks away from your first show, are you feeling nervous, excited, worried? Mick_Mars_Live says: I always get concerned about the first few shows. Once they are over, then I'm thinking it's a piece of cake. MA_86 in Onstage_1 asks: What are your advice to someone (like me) who wants to start a band? You Rock, by the way = ). Gerda, Sweden Mick_Mars_Live says: I had to search for so long to find the right people. Just find some people until you feel it's right. Don't be afraid to tell them if it's not right and keep looking until it is right. Dave_sth in Onstage_1 asks: Hey Mick!! Are you playing this tour your horizontal slide guitars you used on the Feelgood tour? I hope you guys come to Mexico again!! - Dave, Mexico City Mick_Mars_Live says: No, I don't think I'll be using those this year. I do think we are playing Mexico but I'm not sure when. stereoguy75 in Onstage_1 asks: Do you like the new songs as much as the old? Mick_Mars_Live says: Yeah because they are becoming more current sounding. I'm not dating the old songs, but it's hard to keep up with the times and still sound like Motley Crue. Latexluv_2 in Onstage_1 asks: Could you tell us the meaning of the scorpion tattoo on your hand? Latexluv, Dallas, TX Mick_Mars_Live says: I like Scorpios. I like to feel the sting. Texangirl_21 in Onstage_1 asks: Was shooting the video "If I Die Tomorrow" rough for you? Amarillo, Tx Mick_Mars_Live says: It was a little bit hard for me because I just had gotten out of the hospital. It went pretty quick though, it was only about 8 or 9 hours. It was ok, a little rough in some spots, but it was ok. Nikkimars1 in Onstage_1 asks: Hey how do you like being on tour? DishDiva says: Something you look forward to? Mick_Mars_Live says: Always! Yeah, very fun. A lot of times people will come up to me and ask if I remember them, that's the hard part, you meet so many people it's hard to remember every one you meet. 9GUNNZ in Onstage_1 asks: Hi Mick, glad you could be here, did you ever think Motley Crue would still be sitting high on top of the Rock -n- Roll mountain after 20+ years? Mick_Mars_Live says: I'm not trying to sound conceited because I'm not, but I had every intention. NikkiSixx_MotleyCrue1 in Onstage_1 asks: Hi Mick, how are you? How does your family feel about the Crue tour and do you read fan fiction? HJ, AZ Mick_Mars_Live says: I'm not married, but my mom and dad are thrilled I'm able to go on tour. DishDiva says: Were your parents always supportive of your career in music? Mick_Mars_Live says: No. They always totally supported me and the music world. They were regretful that they couldn't help me more. ♫♫♫t©hΦμρρe♫♫♫ in Onstage_1 asks: Hi Mick, how many guitars you have to bring on tour? Mick_Mars_Live says: Not very many, 6 or 8. nightbaby2007 in Onstage_1 asks: Mic how did you guys come up with the song if i die tomorrow?it is a cool song. Mick_Mars_Live says: Nikki came up with the song. He just went in and did it. It is a cool song, it's a fun song to play. ĸοЯŋ_ŁûvęЯ in Onstage_1 asks: Seeing you guys will be my first concert ever ill just have turned 18 and its the best birthday present ive ever had! THANK YOU!!!!YOU ROCK!!! Mick_Mars_Live says: That is great. Dave_sth in Onstage_1 asks: Hey Mick!! You rock my world!! Do you guys plan to play DANGER live on tour?? That song is a Classic!! - Dave ,Mexico City Mick_Mars_Live says: We're not playing that particular song but we are playing songs off that album. We haven't played them in such a long time. We'll play some really cool older stuff and some new stuff. It progresses, it's all good. Overglam in Onstage_1 asks: Are you ready to go to Europe to kick major ass! it's been a long time ! JoNixx from France Mick_Mars_Live says: Of course. I love Paris, that's my place! Yes we'll be there soon. AllisterFiend77 in Onstage_1 asks: What advice would you give to a beginning guitar player? Mick_Mars_Live says: I guess I would say (this is going to sound corny) but be true to your roots. Whatever you like best like rock, jazz, blues, stay with what you love because if you don't you'll regret it. MA_86 in Onstage_1 asks: Hi, Mick. You Rock! Your favourite song to listen to, then? Gerda, Sweden Mick_Mars_Live says: The Jimi Hendrix song "Angel." Vincevixen in Onstage_1 asks: I know Beck was a huge influence for you(great choice) any other influences that are that strong for you? Diane Ont, Canada Mick_Mars_Live says: Lots of people. Jimi Hendrix, Alvin Lee, Jimmy Page, Michel Bloomfield, Eric Clapton, a lot of people like that. I could name a million more, but I'll leave it like that. badboyrocker77 in Onstage_1 asks: hi mick my wife and i are taking our six year old daughter to your spokan show its her first and she loves the crue!! Mick_Mars_Live says: That's cool. I love new fans, especially young ones. Texangirl_21 in Onstage_1 asks: What was one of the best times you've had with Motley Crue over the years? Amarillo, Tx ClassicAndHardRockIsBest in Onstage_1 asks: What is one of your most memorable moments? Patrick from Waukegan, Illinois Mick_Mars_Live says: Let's see... Probably... I was in Sweden, we were playing there and the first night three Swedish girls took me home. It wasn't a sexual thing, we just had fun. gurneecrue in Onstage_1 asks: Mick, Do you still have the red corvette seen in "motley crue uncensored"?-Kent, Chicago Mick_Mars_Live says: Yes. Jamespain0 in Onstage_1 asks: Whats the hardest crue song to play and get right? James from London Mick_Mars_Live says: "Afraid" off the "Generation" album. There were so many electronics going on and it was hard to copy the synthesizers. I still have trouble with that song and that album too. DishDiva says: Mick, we have so many audience questions about where you guys will be on tour. Is there one place you are really looking forward to going? Mick_Mars_Live says: I think Argentina because I haven't been there before. I have a lot of favorite places, but I'm really looking forward to Argentina because we haven't been there before. DishDiva says: Mick, thanks for taking the time to stop by to talk with fans about the tour. DishDiva says: From all of your fans here on MSN, best of luck with the tour! Mick_Mars_Live says: Thank you for staying with us, thank you for being Motley fans, I can speak for the rest of the guys, we all love you and will see you on tour!

[ubourgeois]

Top 30 Films of 2018

I’m actually getting one of these out at a fairly reasonable time! I’m a champion.

Compared to last year, I would say 2018 had fewer films that I really loved, that shook me and immediately registered as important - but also, more films that have grown on me over time, that were clever and inventive in ways that convince me to look past their shortcomings (or reevaluate if they are shortcomings at all). Plenty of odd, perhaps imperfect movies made it far up the list, and I think I ended up privileging that weird streak more than usual this year. But hopefully that makes for interesting reading here.

I found making this list that a couple of the big arthousey hits of the year (Eighth Grade, Burning, The Rider, and others) ended up slipping into the basement of the top 50. Keep an eye out for a rejoinder post following this in a couple days where I hash out my thoughts on those. For now, top 30 after the jump:

30. Unsane dir. Steven Soderbergh

Remember when Tangerine came out and everyone was like, “wow I can’t believe this was shot on an iPhone” and it was a whole thing? Well, I can believe that Unsane was shot on an iPhone, and that’s really for the better. Ever the innovator, Soderbergh follows Sean Baker’s lead by taking full advantage of the logistical advantages and distinctive appearances of iPhone-shot footage, putting together a film that uses its hardware not as a flashy obstacle to be overcome but as a driver of its look and feel, proving at least for now that mobile-shot films are viable (though we’ll see how his next one turns out). The film itself is good too - Claire Foy gives a wonderfully prickly performance, and the claustrophobic visuals make for a great psychological thriller.

29. Cold War dir. Paweł Pawlikowski

Expanding on the aesthetic territory he explored with Ida, Pawlikowski brings another black & white, Polish-language period piece about identities split between different (religious, political) worlds. Cold War is the more complicated and perhaps less focused film, but also the more alluring one, with a luscious love story, incredible music (Łojojoj...), and great, showy performances from Joanna Kulig and Tomasz Kot. In other words, it’s luxurious, romantic Euro-arthouse fare. Probably best watched with a full glass of wine in hand.

28. Ready Player One dir. Steven Spielberg

A film that many accused of “pandering” to audiences for its many blink-and-you’ll-miss-it nods to 80s nostalgia and gaming culture, Ready Player One was on the contrary seemingly uninterested in anything of the sort. It managed to accomplish something more meaningful by packing the film so dense with nerd-bait that it becomes just texture and noise - Tracer popping up in the background of random scenes ends up being less of Overwatch reference and more of a piece of plausible set dressing in a VR social media hub. This contributed to RPO being not only a technically impressive but a visually overwhelming effects film, packaged around a seemingly knowing 80s blockbuster pastiche (the story, the character types, even the music cues were too old-fashioned to be on purpose). A film both smarter and easier to like than the discourse around it suggested.

27. Widows dir. Steve McQueen

I do really wish that McQueen would go back to making demanding, brutal films like Hunger, but if he simply has to become a commercial filmmaker I guess I don’t mind this. Surely the ensemble film of the year, with the entire cast firing on all cylinders - Daniel Kaluuya as the sadistic enforcer/campaign manager in particular impresses, though naturally Viola Davis, Elizabeth Debicki, Cynthia Erivo, and even Colin Farrell make for compelling characters in this twisty, nervy heist film. The action scenes are all impressively mounted (if a bit few and far between) and there are enough McQueen-esque florishes to keep things interesting in the interim (that long car scene!). Great moody popcorn stuff.

26. An Elephant Sitting Still dir. Hu Bo

Elephant has gotten a lot of press for two reasons: its nearly four-hour length and its director’s untimely death shortly after its completion. The length is important because it beats you into submission, forcing you to accept its rhythm and smothering you in tight focus on its main characters until you feel like it’s your own POV (I wasn’t really into it until, uh, the two hour mark, but then somehow I was hooked). Hu Bo’s death is important because knowing that, the sensation of being trapped, pressured, and disoriented by the Current State of China (ever the popular subject matter) feels all the more palpable and, maybe unfortunately, grants the film some extra layer of authority, or at least urgency. If I ever have the time or energy, I would love to revisit this film - I expect it will one day be seen as a landmark.

25. Make Me Up dir. Rachel Maclean

A bizarre little bit of sugary pop-feminist techno-dystopia, pulling off a sort of cinematic cousin to vaporwave by way of Eve Ensler. What unfolds is pretty insane, involving dance numbers, incomprehensible lectures on dodgy gender politics, and sets that look pulled out from a cheap children’s TV show. It’s definitely a marmite film - how well you connect with this will depend heavily on your tolerance for clearly-fake CG, well-trodden feminist talking points, and pastels - but for those with the appetite for this brand of political kitsch then this is just about the best version of itself imaginable. 

24. Liz and the Blue Bird dir. Naoko Yamada

Naoko Yamada out Naoko Yamada-s herself. A standalone spinoff of Hibike! Euphonium that focuses on members of the secondary cast, Liz makes good on the sensitive, subtly-executed love story that the show ultimately failed to produce (not quite Adolescence of Utena-tier course correction, but we’ll take it). This is a film propelled by the tiniest gestures - a hand tensing behind the back, a nervous flicker of the eye, a cheerful bounce in the step - in that way animation can provide that seems not incidental but hugely, blatantly filled with meaning. While A Silent Voice was a great breakthrough for Yamada as an “original” feature, it’s Liz that feels like the more mature film, and a promising indicator for what lies ahead.

23. Sew the Winter to My Skin dir. Jahmil X.T. Qubeka

Maybe the most surprising film of the year is this, an action-biopic about John Kepe, a South African Robin Hood figure, that almost entirely eschews spoken dialogue in favor of visual storytelling, physical acting, and clever audio design. But this is not some pretentious, austere arthouse film substituting gimmicks for actual character; Sew the Winter to My Skin is an engaging, fascinating, and unexpectedly accessible historical epic, prioritizing mythic bigness over simple recitation of fact. While it demands some patience at first (with no dialogue, it takes a bit for the film to properly introduce its cast), it quickly shows itself to be an inventive, exciting, and occasionally funny adventure that proves Qubeka as a truly exciting voice in South African cinema.

22. Mom and Dad dir. Brian Taylor

Forget Mandy, THIS is the crazy Nic Cage movie of the year. A slick, rapid-fire horror comedy that feels almost like a music video at points, Mom and Dad has what’s surely Cage’s best unhinged performance in years as well as a great, more restrained turn by Selma Blair. The violence is ludicrous, the premise is nutty, and the sense of humor is utterly sick - that the film manages to squeeze out a surprisingly coherent commentary on suburban family life on top of this is a minor miracle (a scene where Cage destroys a pool table proves strangely thoughtful). For all the broadly acclaimed “serious” horror films in recent years, like this year’s kind of boring Hereditary, groan-filled A Quiet Place, and mostly incoherent Suspiria, I more appreciate this breed of deranged, funny, and tightly focused effort. It doesn’t need to be that deep.

21. Good Manners dir. Marco Dutra, Juliana Rojas

I’m going to mark this write-up with a **spoiler warning**, as I think it’s basically impossible to talk about this film without giving the game away. Good Manners has one of the best genre switcheroos in recent years, starting off as a proper Brazilian class drama (think Kleber Mendonça Filho) with a lesbian twist before explosively transforming into a horror movie that reveals a hidden monster-coming-of-age story that’s nearly unrecognizable as the same film from an hour before. As delightful as this bit of narrative sleight of hand is, it can’t justify a good film alone, which is where the great lead performance by Isabél Zuaa and the mesermizing, inventive matte paintings of the São Paulo skyline come into play, making this fantastical, genre-bending film a true original of the year.

20. The Miseducation of Cameron Post dir. Desiree Akhavan

There’s a tendency in the queer teen film genre to sometimes drift towards miserablist portrayals of growing up; to emphasize the hardship, nonunderstanding, and isolation to the expense of other experiences. Cameron Post manages to avoid this path even as it explores the dreadful premise of life in a conversion camp by balancing the solidarity, humor, and defiant joy hidden along the edges of the camp experience with the cruel, dehumanizing nature of the place. The film works, then, not only as a statement against conversion therapy and the real harm it does to all participants, but also as a lively, triumphant teen movie that feels more powerful than the lazy, doom-and-gloom approach.

19. Minding the Gap dir. Bing Liu

Few films capture the particular small city Midwest atmosphere quite like this one, a very raw documentary that feels very much like the first feature it is - but in a good way. Cut together from years of Liu’s amateur footage as well as new material of its subjects (the director and two of his old friends), a documentary that at first seems to be about the local skateboarding culture stretches out to many other topics: domestic violence, race relations, middle-American economic anxiety. The film, perhaps because of its closeness to the director and his relative inexperience, manages to take on a quick-moving scattershot approach, weaving stream-of-consciousness from one topic to the next, while still giving each the time and weight it deserves. 

18. The Green Fog dir. Evan Johnson, Galen Johnson, Guy Maddin

A hard film to sum up, though at its heart not a terribly complicated one. Ostensibly a very loose reconstruction of Vertigo using clips from other material shot in San Francisco, from The Conversation to San Andreas to Murder, She Wrote, this new, uh, thing from Maddin and the Johnsons is a short, sweet, and really quite funny collage less interested in slavishly reenacting its inspiration than making funny jokes with movie clips. Some highlights include Rock Hudson carefully watching an *NSYNC music video on a tiny screen, a long sequence admiring Chuck Norris’ face that doesn’t seem to match any particular part of Vertigo, and a number of scenes of dialogue with all the speech cut out, leaving only awkward pauses and mouth noises. It’s high art!

17. Sorry to Bother You dir. Boots Riley

Boots Riley’s transition from long-standing underrated rapper to breakout auteur has been wild to witness. Sorry to Bother You is certainly one of 2018′s most original and distinctive films (what other film is it like, exactly?), and any complaints about unsubtle politics or overpacked narrative can be easily counterbalanced with the film’s sheer verve and oddball energy. Like Widows, it’s another of the great ensemble pieces of the year - Lakeith Stanfield and Tess Thompson are great as usual, and of the supporting cast Armie Hammer emerges as the standout with an incredibly funny halfway-villainous turn, plus a great bit of voice casting with David Cross. Leading candidate for this year’s Film of the Moment.

16. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse dir. Robert Persichetti Jr., Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman

The problem with comic book movies a lot of the time is that they’re somehow too embarrassed to own their source material. Into the Spider-Verse succeeds because it emphatically embraces its roots, not only visually (the cel shading, impact lines, and even text boxes that make up the film’s look) but also narratively, by adopting the multiverse concept in earnest and milking it for comedic and dramatic effect. It’s an incredibly innovative (not to mention gorgeous) animated film that not only raises the standard but expands the scope of superhero films, giving new hope to a genre that has been stuck spinning its wheels for years. Plus, it has probably the only post-credits scene actually worth the effort, which is a very special sort of victory.

15. Museo dir. Alonso Ruizpalacios

A playful, thoughtful heist film that gets the actual heist out of the way as soon as possible. Two suburban twenty-somethings pull off a daring robbery of Mayan artifacts from the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City, then set off on an ill-fated roadtrip to fence the goods. There’s a certain magic to this film, in its approach that is at once totally reverent and mythologizing but also eager to take the piss out of everything (the recurring motif of Revueltas’ The Night of the Mayas suite does both), and in how it turns this story into something of a love letter to the history and geography of Mexico. Very mature, well-balanced filmmaking in Ruizpalacios’ second feature.

14. BlacKkKlansman dir. Spike Lee

The best Spike Lee joint in a long, long time. It taps into the freewheeling, confrontational energy of his best work, but almost as a career victory lap as he makes a game out of outfoxing Klan members. There’s plenty of humor and tension here, with a great, dry leading duo in John David Washington and Adam Driver, and a funny turn from Topher Grace (!) as David Duke. Even if it does play it a bit safe with an easy target and wraps up a bit too easily (a quick flash-forward to Charlottesville as a postscript notwithstanding), it should be fine, I think, for a film to indulge in the simple pleasure of overcoming obvious villains in a glorious fashion. For all the recent films that give nuanced and serious takes on racism in America, one ought to be about the joy of blowing up the KKK.

13. Mirai dir. Mamoru Hosoda

Since he’s started making original features, Hosoda has been taken with relatively high-concept storylines, from his “debut” The Girl Who Leapt Through Time to Wolf Children, but Mirai is certainly his most ambitious yet. Nearly every choice about the film is a bit weird: from the unusual, compact layout of Kun’s home to Kun’s very believable, nearly alienating (to an older audience) childish behavior to the simply bizarre logistics and metaphysics of Kun’s fantastic adventures. The time- and space-travel antics Kun and Mirai get up to never seem entirely literal or entirely imagined, somewhere between childish fable and psychological sci-fi, a mixture that culminates in a surprisingly existential climax for an unabashed children’s film. After the quite safe The Boy and the Beast, it’s exciting to see Hosoda branch out into such a complicated and strange project, certainly the most daring animated feature of the year.

12. Support the Girls dir. Andrew Bujalski

A bubbly, sensitive, and lightly anarchic workplace comedy in that most essential of American institutions: the Hooters-flavored sports bar off the highway. Bujalski continues to prove himself an observant and funny writer, putting together a fascinating ensemble of characters brought to life by a perfectly-cast ensemble (Regina Hall is flawless as advertised, and Haley Lu Richardson brings us one of the most adorable characters in cinema). I don’t think I’ve seen a more charming film about workers’ solidarity and the lively communities that find their niche in liminal spaces. 

11. First Reformed dir. Paul Schrader

Edgy priests are in a certain way low-hanging fruit; the tension is automatic, the contradiction inherently compelling. It’s a lazy symbol that can be milked for cheap profundity when employed, if you will, in bad faith. That’s why it’s so important that First Reformed, for all of its alcoholic, violent, libidinous angst packed into Ethan Hawke’s (masterfully interpreted) character, is also a great, genuine film about faith besides. It’s a Revelations film if I’ve ever seen one, about facing down the apocalypse with no way of understanding God’s plan, about living on the precipice of a collapse of belief, about accepting mystery. It’s the only film I saw this year that communicated actual dread, but even then still, somehow, bizarrely hopeful. 

10. Birds of Passage dir. Cristina Gallego, Ciro Guerra

Ciro Guerra (now with partner Cristina Gallego co-directing) follows up the excellent Embrace of the Serpent with another powerful portrait of an indigenous community that, under the pressure of colonial influence, gradually devours itself. In the new film, however, this takes the form of a traditional gangster film, from the humble beginnings and runaway success to the explosions of violence and crumbling of an empire. Birds of Passage shows the origins of the Colombian drug trade with the native Wayuu people (a counterpoint, Gallego explains, to the much-celebrated Pablo Escobar narrative), and in doing so still finds room to organically and respectfully depict the traditions of the Wayuu, as well as showcase their beautiful language, which makes up much of the film’s dialogue. Best film in the genre since at least Carlos. 

09. The Favourite dir. Yorgos Lanthimos

Though I really admire Dogtooth, I’ve found myself increasingly disappointed in Lanthimos’ output since that film. Alps was fine but clearly minor; The Lobster started strong but fizzled out; Killing of a Sacred Deer was ultimately too self-consciously bizarre. With The Favourite, we’re finally back in exciting, unsettlingly weird territory, Yorgos having found that his very mannered style of English dialogue works superbly in a costume drama context. He also gets great, uncharacteristically emotive performances (compared to, say, the last two Colin Farrell outings) out of his central trio of Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, and Emma Stone, with especially great work coming from Stone, who I think has discovered that all of her best roles take full advantage of the fact that she looks like a cartoon character. It’s wonderfully perverse, incredibly funny stuff, with one of the great, inexplicable endings of the year - fair to call it a Buñuel revival.

08. Bisbee ‘17 dir. Robert Greene

A documentary that tackles a shocking forgotten chapter in American labor history - a group of strikers deported from their mining town and left for dead in the desert - as well as the potential of historical reenactment to act as communal therapy. Greene moves a bit sideways from his usual performance-centric subject matter to show a different kind of performance meant not to affect the audience but the performers themselves, breaking through decades of near-silence on Bisbee’s tumultuous small town history. It’s also a remarkably multi-faceted film; though it would certainly be easy to side fully with the strikers, Greene makes sure to document the perspectives of current Bisbee citizens who sympathize with or even celebrate the decision to deport, complicating the emotions and politics of the reenactment in genuinely interesting ways. A powerful, important documentary.

07. Asako I & II dir. Ryusuke Hamaguchi

Unwieldy and annoying English title aside (especially considering all the possible translations of Netemo Sametemo), Asako seems on the surface like nothing more than a cheap TV romance. It hits many of the same beats and adopts much of the visual style associated with this vein of visual media, particularly in the music video-esque, almost-supernatural meet-cute that opens the film. But hidden beneath these affectations is a shockingly cold un-romance, a story with an inevitable bad end that you’re tricked into thinking might not come to pass. By employing so many stylistic and even verbal cliches, Hamaguchi reveals how these internalized these storytelling devices are, and how they not only can’t prepare us for the complications of actual relationships, but even shift our expectations away from reality. It’s an absolute gut-punch of a film, covered in a seductively sweet carapace. 

06. Sweet Country dir. Warwick Thornton

In a fairly large shift from his previous Samson and Delilah, Thornton has put together one of the best and most unusual Westerns in recent years. Featuring great, earthy performances from its nonprofessional cast (plus a bit of Sam Neill and Bryan Brown for good measure) and a weird, almost Malicky flash-forward structure, the film explores a not-widely-depicted history of exploitation of indigenous Australians. It’s a sad film, showing a fairly exciting lead-up to a somewhat deflating moment of unjust violence - but of course, many of the best Westerns aren’t about good triumphing, either. It’s the film on this list that most grew on me over the course of the year, having not impressed me at first but then blowing me away on a second viewing. 

05. Leave No Trace dir. Debra Granik

For all the buzz surrounding Winter’s Bone - a film that still holds up after so many years - it’s a bit surprising that it took Granik eight years to put out a follow-up, but I guess it’s worth the wait. Unlike Bone, Leave No Trace is a kind, gentle film, leaving behind the edgy Ozarkian drama of its predecessor for a similar but more forgiving setting of woodland communities in the Pacific Northwest. It initially seduces you with Ben Foster’s outdoorsy survivalist lifestyle, cut off by seemingly uncaring state officials, but gradually revealing, through the second thoughts of his daughter (Thomasin McKenzie, in a shall we say Lawrencian turn), the downsides and flawed motivations for their lifestyle choice. It’s a quiet and thoughtful film, melancholy and optimistic in equal measure. Makes one hope Granik can get another project off the ground sooner. 

04. Roma dir. Alfonso Cuarón

I mean, what else can we say about Roma? It’s about as good as claimed, beautifully shot, framed, written, acted, whatever. It’s at its best, sort of ironically, when Cuarón breaks up the quiet personal drama for some of his characteristic action-y set pieces (a Children of Men-esque protest sequence and the climax on the beach are particularly memorable), but he also shows his talent in handling relatively uneventful family scenes, using the layout of the house to facilitate some surprisingly interesting camera movements. I’m happy that Cuarón, who could easily transition into a more boring prestige Hollywood filmmaker if he so chose, is using his industry clout to pull together neat little films like this. 

03. The Old Man & the Gun dir. David Lowery

What a completely pleasant film. A film that walks a dangerous tightrope - one of nostalgia, roguish charm, and incessant aw-shucks optimism - that can easily fall into twee, navel-gazing hell, but that miraculously pulls it off, resulting in a genuinely spirit-lifting character study of an almost folkloric figure. Robert Redford’s good in this, but of course he is - that’s the whole point. Perhaps more appropriate to say that this film is good for Robert Redford, that it rises to the occasion of celebrating his career in full and pulls it off without appearing trite or disposable. As good a (reportedly) final outing as anyone could ask for.

02. I Do Not Care If We Go Down in History as Barbarians dir. Radu Jude

A nearly three-hour, densely conversational, nakedly didactic examination of the historical effects and contemporary sources of fascism and ethnic nationalism that somehow flies right by. Radu Jude, a relative latecomer to Romanian cinema’s rise to international prominence, makes a strong argument for being his country’s best and most important filmmaker, taking on complicated, controversial, and infrequently discussed subject matter about Romania’s troubled past. If you can get past Barbarians’ sort of user-unfriendly exterior (Iona Iacob opens the film by introducing herself and explaining her character, which tells you the sort of thing you’re getting into), it should prove to be a remarkably stimulating and even fiendishly funny ride. 

01. Shoplifters dir. Hirokazu Koreeda

If you’ve spent the ten years since Still Walking wondering what exactly Koreeda is trying to do anymore, then this is your answer. He’s spent most of the last decade pumping out the same nonconventional family drama over and over again (everything from I Wish to After the Storm, at least) so he could hone his skills like a weapon and create the perfect, ultimate version. With a pitch-perfect cast (Koreeda regulars Lily Franky and Kirin Kiki are the standouts, but Sakura Ando, Mayu Matsuoka, and the two child actors more than hold their own), and probably the perfect expression of the chosen family, spots and all, that has consumed much of Koreeda’s career, Shoplifters is one of its director’s career-best films, showcasing all of his talent for depicting delicate, intimate moments and bringing smart, complex ideas to seemingly straightforward premises. The most exciting Palme d’Or winner in years and easily the best film of 2018.

[chronicolicity]

Spoilers for Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald

Subject: Dumbledore’s motivations

About that blood pact.

I don’t get why I’ve been seeing posts that the filmmakers screwed up by including the blood pact as the reason why Dumbledore can’t go after Grindelwald. At first glance, I see how the people unhappy with it got there, but if you think about it, the blood pact and Dumbledore still having Feelings are not mutually exclusive. The film has faults, sure, but this isn’t the worse sin it’s committed, IMO.

This is my two cents, and based off only one viewing of the film. So if you’re not interested, like, you can not read this.

1. Filmmakers want you to buy the film and where it’s taking you

From what I understand of movies and storytelling, the people doing the films generally try to make the story at least somewhat convincing - yes, I know FBCOG fell short in a few respects here - but I don’t think the blood pact was one of those areas.

Like, sure, they could’ve just said that Dumbledore’s still in love with Grindelwald, which is why he can’t fight the dude. I would’ve bought that...if Grindelwald was still being played by Colin Farrell.

I mean. I’m shallow.

But Grindelwald isn’t being played by Colin Farrell.

Grindelwald, circa 1890s.

Grindelwald, circa 1927.

The dude did not age well. Let’s just put it like that.

But sure, appearances are a matter of personal preference, and that certainly shouldn’t stop the film-makers from sticking with ‘Dumbledore still has feelings’ as the sole reason why he can’t make a move against his ex. Which leads me to the second (related) reason -

2. They HAVE to stretch things out until the final Dumbledore/Grindelwald duel in 1945

Not that Dumbledore’s a saint (*cough why is Newt cleaning up your mess*), but like, if he sits on his ass teaching Transfiguration/DADA from 1927 onward while Grindelwald’s swanning around Europe being an open fascist, recruiting followers, murdering humans (general evil stuff, you get the idea) UNTIL NINETEEN FORTY-FIVE -

Dumbledore doesn’t just look like a dude pining for his ex. He’s an asshole who’s letting innocent people die.

To me, the blood pact adds a complication, given how evil we’ve seen Grindelwald be, that’s stopping Dumbledore from going after him, as much as he might (or might not, deep down) want to. No one knows Grindelwald better than Albus Dumbledore. No one else knows what he’s capable of.

Put that together with the fan theories that in their first duel involving Arianna and Aberforth, i.e. that a curse fired off by one of them rebounded because of the blood pact and killed Dumbledore’s teenage sister, Dumbledore knows what happens if he tries to hurt Grindelwald with the blood pact still in force.

Dumbledore’s a lot of things, past and present, but he’s also not a moron. To me, the blood pact works. Could the film-makers have done a better job of setting it up? Yes. Maybe some scenes explaining this were cut for time constraints or were never filmed at all, but without the exposition on the blood pact, it fits with Dumbledore’s nature to, like, play the cards so close to his chest that, oh, I don’t know, a seventeen-year-old kid finds out he’s supposed to die literally five minutes before it happens. Again, FBCOG is not a perfect movie, but the depiction of the blood pact sits consistently with what we know about Dumbledore’s way of handling things.

Plus, they might be saving a longer explanation of the blood pact and its significance to Dumbledore until movie number 3. Heartbreaking flashback to the duel that killed Arianna, anybody?

So back to the blood pact -

3. How is the blood pact unromantic?

This is where I’m like “????” when I see posts hating on the blood pact for covering up/glossing over Dumbledore’s romance with Grindelwald.

I’m sorry, but do you gaze deeply into your very platonic friend’s smoldering eyes in a barn - just the two of you - with your hands cut in the exact same place and pressed up together so your blood and his blood bleed together all passionately and symbolically - while the both of you basically make O-faces doing it - all so you can have a pretty silver amulet thing with two drops of your blood floating around together in it, suspended, for like, an eternity, emblematic of your mutual promise never, ever, ever, to fight each other?

I clearly don’t get how platonic stuff works if the majority answer is yes, we platonic best mates make blood pacts all the time exactly like that.

My point being, they were in love (*cough we were more than brothers*). And to me, the movie didn’t say it, but they showed it.

You don’t make a magical, super-binding promise you can’t break, and by that I mean the substance of the promise, and the way they made the promise (see: hands clasped, gazing into each other’s eyes, etc) unless you’re bonkers in love.

(The real scene’s longer, but it was so not platonic in the movie)

Conclusion

The blood pact doesn’t mean Dumbledore wasn’t in love with Grindelwald, and IMHO, if they just stuck with “oh, he’s conflicted about the ex he used to love or maybe still loves a little” as Dumbledore’s reason for not going after Grindelwald, in the context of Grindelwald being shown as an internationally wanted fugitive, and like, EVIL, it makes zero sense that Dumbledore sits on his ass to wait and duel Grindelwald until 1945.

So, can we get back to talking about that Aurelius Dumbledore thing? Because THAT makes no sense.

[fionnfanatics]

Request: Heyyy! I’m absolutely loving your writing, if you get the chance could you write something where you have worked with harry on his solo stuff in the music industry (assistant, manager or whatever) and you have become good friends. he somehow introduces you to some of the dunkirk guys at an awards show or something and one of them (maybe jack or tom gc) takes quite a liking to you oh-la-la… ;)

————————- From the time you were little, you had always wanted to be in the music industry. So when the time for college came, you went for music management. Now you were newly graduated with a job at Erskine Records Ltd.

For the past two years you’d had an internship with Columbia Records. It was there that you met Harry Styles.

When your boss came to you asking for you to work with the young superstar, you instantly agreed. You were sick of working with older artists, and apparently he was sick of working with an old staff. He wanted someone young and new.

The two of you became really close, often having little sleepovers where you’d eat junk food and work on his album in the studio all night. When Harry decided to start his own record label, Erskine, he offered you a job.

You instantly accepted.

Now months later you were working for him and you couldn’t be happier. The two of you had a 5 month prank war going, and neither of you were backing down anytime soon.

Currently you were at the Dunkirk after party, per Harry’s request. You never were one to give up free food and drinks, so of course you came.

Harry had claimed he wanted his ‘best girl’ to be there, but unbeknownst to you he really wanted you to meet his co-star Tom Glynn Carney.

It had all started during filming, Harry wanting to set the two of you up. He was showing some pictures to a few of the boys, when he passed one of you and him together. Tom had instantly been smitten, amusing Harry immensely. When Harry heard you complaining one day about being single, he came up with a plan.

Neither Tom nor you knew about this plan, but Harry was absolutely giddy as he walked towards you with Tom, Jack, Barry and Fionn by his side.

You were talking to a few people by the bar, when arms wrapped around you from behind and lips were pressed to your cheek.

“There she is!” The familiar British voice spoke, causing you to smile.

“It’s about time you got here. It’s not polite to make a lady wait.” You teased, turning around to give your friend a proper hug.

“Sorry love, some of us can’t look as great as you without trying.” Harry spoke, pulling away just as you rolled your eyes.

“It’s really because some of us aren’t little divas.” You joked, poking his dimple. He stuck his tongue out at you, a glint in his eyes.

“Am not!”

“Are too!”

“Alrigh’ kids, break it up.” A Scottish voice spoke, causing you and Harry to glance at the source. For the first time you noticed four other men standing there, watching the interaction between you and Harry amusedly.

You took in each boy individually, recognizing them from Harry’s videos and pictures he sent to you. The man who had just spoke had blonde hair and blue eyes, add in the Scottish accent and you knew it had to be Jack Lowden.

The boy next to him had dark hair and dark eyes. You’d seen him before in a movie with Colin Farrel, so you knew he was Barry Keoghan.

The next to were boys you’d never seen before on tv or in movies, but you recognized them easy enough. One was Fionn Whitehead, and the other was Tom Glynn Carney.

Your eyes met Tom’s last, and ended up lingering on his for longer than any of the others. He was staring back at you, seemingly in awe. When he smiled at you, you nearly lost your breath. He was startlingly handsome.

“If you’ll excuse me.” You quickly said to the group you had been talking to, linking Harry’s arm in yours and walking away. Once at the other side of the room, you stopped and turned to face the five men. “Thank god you came. They were so boring.”

The men all laughed, amused at your misfortune.

“Are you going to introduce your gorgeous friend Harry? Or are you going to make us do it?” Tom spoke up after a moment, causing you to flush slightly at his compliment.

“I was getting to that!” Harry defended, watching Tom closely with a smirk on his face. “Y/N, these are some of my cast mates from Dunkirk. There’s Jack, Barry, Fionn and Tom. Boys, this is my good friend and Erskine assistant manager Y/N.”

“It’s so nice to meet all of you.” You said, breaking your eye contact with Tom.

“It’s great to meet you too! Harry’s talked about you a lot.” Fionn smiled, the others nodding along with him.

“Good things I hope.” You responded, glancing over at Harry again.

“I’m afraid he didn’t do you quite enough justice. You’re even more beautiful in person.” You were blushing again as you looked at Tom, heart picking up speed ever so slightly.

“Blimey, are you trying to turn me into a tomato? Because it’s working.” You asked, trying to force the blush down.

“You’re cute when you’re flustered.” He sheugfed, a wide grin on his face as he watched you. The other boys exchanged looks, quickly excusing themselves from the two of you.

You glared at Harry, growing slightly suspicious after he winked at you and quickly dashed away. You looked back at Tom, shuffling awkwardly on your feet for a moment.

“And then there were two.” You told him, causing him to chuckle.

“Can I buy you a drink?” He asked, offering his arm to you.

“I wouldn’t mind.” You responded, linking your arm with his and heading towards the bar.

For the next 3 hours the two of you chatted, flirted and drank. You now felt comfortable around him, sharing stories about your childhood and working with Harry.

Tom was ridiculously sweet and funny, never missing an opportunity to compliment you or make you laugh.

By the end of the night you were definitely falling for him. I mean, how could you not?

As the two of you continued to talk, Harry eventually made his way over to you to say goodbye. He shook hands with Tom, before pressing a kiss to your cheek and leaving.

Once he was gone, Tom looked at you with a contemplative look on his face.

“What?” You asked him, taking a sip of your water. You’d stopped drinking 20 minutes ago after starting to feel a slight buzz, knowing your roommate would be coming to get you soon.

“You and Harry are awfully close. Is there anything going on between you two?” Tom asked, leaning on his elbows as he faced you.

“Of course not! Harry’s like a brother to me. And I’m like a sister to him. That’ll never change.” You replied, keeping eye contact with him.

“Good, that’s good for my chances.” You stared at him in confusion, prompting him to continue. “Well, this way when I take you on a date I won’t feel guilty about it.”

“And who says you’re getting a date?” You asked him calmly, though internally you were freaking out. Was he asking you out?

“Oh come on, you can’t tell me that after these past 3 hours you don’t feel the connection too? You can’t say that we wouldn’t be good together.” You were blushing furiously at that point, dipping your head to hide it from him. Just then, your phone ringed, causing you to breath a sigh of relief.

“Hold that thought.” You told him, answering your phone. It was your roommate, telling you she was there to get you.

A few moments later you were hanging up, turning to face Tom once more.

“I’m sorry, but that was my roommate. She’s picking me up.” You explained, gathering your purse and scribbling a few things on a napkin before sliding it towards Tom. “Hopefully we’ll see each other again.” You told him, stretching to place a light kiss on his cheek before walking away.

“Wait a moment! Can’t I at least get your number?” Tom called after you, causing you to glance over your shoulder at him with a grin.

“You already have it. It’s on the napkin.”

[enchantedbyhiddles]

Very good read and explains why movie star and good actor are terms to describe different things. And why saying an actor is not a celebrity and not a movie star is not an insult and doesn’t say anything about talent or longevity of a career. Not even about success. Great actors don’t have to be stars and stars are very often not the best actors.

(long article behind the cut)

Like many film critics, I started out to be a mortician, but got sidetracked. Yet vestiges of that childhood vocation linger on in my lifelong fascination with autopsies, particularly postmortems involving epic film failures.

In this context, I have thought a lot about King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, a colossal bomb. There are many things wrong with the film – the story, the directing, the fact that the screenwriter forgot to include Merlin – but the biggest problem is the casting. A few months before the film was released, I started noticing posters advertising a star I didn’t immediately recognise. Somebody named Charlie Hunnam. “Do you know him?” I asked my son.

“He’s the guy from Sons of Anarchy,” he replied.

Well, precisely. He’s not Matt Damon. He’s not Brad Pitt. He’s not James Franco. He’s certainly not Denzel Washington or Jamie Foxx. He’s the guy from Sons of Anarchy, a reasonably popular cable TV show most people have never heard of, much less seen. He’s the guy most famous for almost being in 50 Shades of Grey.

Hunnam reportedly talked his way into the starring role in King Arthur, convincing Guy Ritchie that he could carry the ball. He could not carry the ball, as we now know. Ritchie should have written Lady Guinevere into the screenplay and asked if Gal Gadot was available. One of the most annoying things about King Arthur was Hunnam’s thoroughly predictable turn as a cheeky working-class lad. That worked well in Ritchie’s early movies because cheeky East End lads were in vogue at the time, and Ritchie had rising star Jason Statham on the payroll. Statham brought an affable roguishness to rollicking gangster movies, a quality he has never entirely lost; he was the glue that held the whole thing together. In King Arthur, Ritchie didn’t have anyone to hold the whole thing together. He had the guy from Sons of Anarchy. So the cheeky medieval prole schtick fell flat.

Hunnam is by no means a dud – he is quite good in the art house film The Lost City of Z – and he may yet avoid the fate of Jason Momoa, the large but ultimately ineffective tent pole around which the abysmal 2011 Conan the Barbarianwas erected. Yet the similarities are startling: an actor best known for appearing on a popular cable TV show (Game of Thrones) gets into the ring with the big boys. And promptly gets his head handed to him.

Hunnam is a tad on the generic, nondescript side, especially compared to King Arthur’s nemesis, played by the emphatically non-generic Jude Law, who upstages the putative star of the movie at every turn. Bear in mind that the basic structure of motion pictures has not changed in 100 years: a man has a problem, be it shark, alien life form, loan shark or fascist pig, and he has to solve this problem in less than two hours. If the audience is not interested in the man or the problem, the movie tanks. This is also true of films starring women.

In King Arthur, Law’s problem – Oh, will no one rid me of this cheeky prole? – is more interesting than Hunnam’s problem because Law is more interesting than Hunnam. When the two share the screen, our eyes naturally travel to Law because our eyes aren’t stupid.

Hunnam comes off as a poor man’s Tom Hardy. But here is an intriguing issue. Hardy, remarkable actor that he is, is not an instantly recognisable star like Tom Cruise or Vin Diesel or Sylvester Stallone or the Rock. He has never got top billing in the kind of career-defining film that absolutely everybody on the planet saw: Top Gun, Thelma and Louise, Forrest Gump, The Matrix, Rocky, The Hunger Games. So, is Hardy himself a movie star? Well, if the criterion for being a movie star is the ability to light up the screen as soon as you show up, then there is no question that Hardy is bona fide. But this is different from being a matinee idol or a living legend or an icon or Jennifer Lawrence or any of those other words used to describe our celluloid heroes. Hardy, who has made quite a name for himself by vanishing into assorted roles, has a Zelig-like quality. He’s here. He’s there. He’s everywhere. He can do anything, play anybody: a dimwit New York bartender, a Russian copper, a cruel, atavistic London gangster. Make that two cruel, atavistic London gangsters.

Hardy has an amazing CV. He was brilliant in The Revenant. He was brilliant in Locke, where he spends the entire 85 minutes talking on a car phone. He was brilliant in Bronson, a tour de force about Britain’s most violent jailbird. He was brilliant in Child 44, Inception and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. He was brilliant in good films, brilliant in bad films.

But does that make him a movie star? I’m not so sure. A movie star isn’t somebody film lovers rave about. They aren’t even somebody the general public raves about. They are somebody the ordinary person can pick out of a police lineup. Can you do that with Guy Pearce? Ciaran Hinds? Hugo Weaving? Outstanding actors, all. But movie stars? Hmm. In a way, it all comes down to the vaunted Thespian Brothers Conundrum. Owen Wilson? Movie star. Luke Wilson? Not a movie star. Alec Baldwin? Movie star. Anybody else named Baldwin? Not a movie star.

Let’s just leave the Quaids and the Afflecks out of this.

Here is the problem in a nutshell. Every time I talk to someone about how much I enjoy watching Hardy and how much I look forward to his next film, I have to remind people who he is. C’mon, guys, work with me. Tom Hardy. You know, the bad guy in The Revenant? Didn’t see it. OK then, the bad guy in The Dark Knight Rises? Oh yeah, him. But didn’t he have a mask on the whole time? OK, the guy who played Mad Max the last time around? Oh, yeah, him. The guy with the mask on his face half the movie. But mostly I remember Charlize Theron. And the rest of the girls.

OK, I continue, my hackles up because in my view not worshipping in the Church of Hardy is like refusing to genuflect in the Cathedral of Daniel Day-Lewis, did you see The Drop? No. Lawless? No. This Means War? No. How about the film where Hardy plays the Kray brothers so convincingly you cannot believe it is the same actor playing both Ronnie and Reg? Sorry, didn’t see it.

I don’t have to do this kind of stuff with Jude Law, Mark Wahlberg, George Clooney. I don’t have to do it with Viggo Mortensen or Colin Farrell. I don’t even have to do it with John C Reilly. I certainly don’t have to do it with Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway or Angelina Jolie. So even though Hardy is a better actor than most of them, and in certain instances a much better actor, I never have to pull out my iPhone to remind people who they are. Hardy, like Mark Strong, falls into that category of actors that are simultaneously famous yet hard to describe from memory. Fans of these guys routinely imagine they are bigger stars than they are. They are like rock critics who want Alejandro Escovedo and Son Volt to be more revered than U2. But reality is reality, and reality bites. If you put Tom Hardy on the cover of People magazine, the public would say, “Wait a minute. Where’s Johnny Depp?”

There’s a term for people like this. They are all gods, but they are gods of a lesser order. They are the Working Famous.

Charlie Hunnam should be so lucky.