#mr. neeson this post is directed at you

[nintenderniere]

As much as I love short Obi-Wan posts I can’t help but think that- Obi-Wan isn’t even short, everybody around him is just abnormally tall

Padawan!Obi-Wan: Master, please, I understand that the negotiations are short and that if we don’t hurry up they’re going to end without us but you must take into consideration my teeny tiny legs. Compared to you I am an ant. I cannot keep up with you. When you find yourself running ahead please remember to take my itty bitty legs into account. You fucking mammoth.

Qui-Gon: oh for force sake Obi-Wan we don’t have time for this just put on a pair of roller skates and hang onto my sleeves as tight as you can we need to go

Obi-Wan, more then ten years later, struggling to keep up with Anakin: oh no not good, not again

Obi-Wan, twenty more years later, facing off against Vader on the Death Star: *tilting his head straight up to look him in the eyes* okay I think this is getting quite a bit out of hand

[joealwyndaily]

Sometimes the best Christmas presents are the ones we don’t think we need; a new Christmas Carol, for instance. Indeed it may be indicative of a certain unappreciated vacancy around the Christmas tree that in discussing the BBC’s new version of the Dickens classic both its director and leading man refer back to The Muppet Christmas Carol made way back in 1992.

“I was sent the script,” admits Nick Murphy, best known for directing the Rebecca Hall ghost movie The Awakening, “and my first thought was, ‘For God’s sake! The Muppets! They nailed it. What’s the point?’ ”

Joe Alwyn, who plays Scrooge’s clerk Bob Cratchit in the BBC three-parter, has meanwhile posted a trailer on Instagram with the caption: “Hard to fill the shoes once worn by Kermit. But I tried.” The self-deprecation was quickly “hearted” by the singer Taylor Swift, who is the actor’s girlfriend and who will be watching the mini-series with Alwyn and his family in London in the final days before Christmas.

There is nothing wrong, of course, with The Muppet Christmas Carol. It is probably in most people’s top three adaptations of Dickens’s masterpiece (alongside, I would say, Alastair Sim’s 1951 version and Scrooged). Its endurance does suggest, however, that it may be time someone did something a bit more serious, a little darker and a touch more grown-up with a tale that excoriated Victorian neglect and associated Christmas with the relief of poverty for ever more.

And this is exactly what Nick Murphy has achieved with a bracingly fresh script by the Peaky Blinders creator Steven Knight. Guy Pearce’s Ebenezer Scrooge is still a “squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous old sinner”, but since Pearce is only 52, there is rather less of the old. At the end of the novel, Dickens wrote that “ever afterwards” — that is after Scrooge’s Very Bad Night — “it was always said of him that he knew how to keep Christmas well”. That is rather more of an achievement when, as in this version, you may have 40 Christmases, rather than a couple, left to you.

Equally remade is Cratchit, who in Alwyn’s incarnation is far from the bashfully gulping frog thanking his master for granting him Christmas Day off before scampering back to Miss Piggy’s fleshy arms. Although Alwyn grew a rough beard for the part, his is also the best-looking Bob Cratchit you have seen. As the actor and I talk at the Picturehouse Central cinema in London, I find him as mesmerising off screen as on.

“Bob is trapped by Scrooge,” Alwyn says. “He’s abused by him. He’s not treated fairly. He’s there only because he has to be. He’s treated like shit.”

I’d say there’s a definite feeling in their shared scenes that Bob might just snap and hit Ebenezer over the head with a poker. “That was the intention. He’s at breaking point. He’s pushed right to his limits and Scrooge, I think, relishes winding him up. All Bob can do is hold his ground and fight back as much as he can — but he isn’t such a sap in this version.”

Scrooge and Cratchit’s relationship so much resembles an unhappy marriage that the niggling, bitter exchanges invented by Knight, with very little reference to Dickens’s dialogue, resemble Steptoe and Son rewritten by Strindberg. The easy contrast would have been with the Cratchits’ poor but happy marriage, but this too comes under scrutiny. There is an acknowledgment of the challenges a disabled child can bring to a household, and it is somehow emphasised by Tiny Tim being played by Lenny Rush, an extraordinary young actor, aged ten, who has a rare form of dwarfism called spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, the same condition as Warwick Davis.

“It really mattered to me that nobody was photo-fit,” Murphy says from a studio where he is dubbing the last episode. “Bob Cratchit is always a winsome, put-upon nice guy and the Cratchits themselves represent this idea of an ideal, working-class, lovely family. So we looked into their relationship on the page and there seems a genuine tension between Bob and his wife. Things are hard. It isn’t easy to have no money and a disabled child, and they lean on each other and they’re not straight with each other and there is a genuine antagonism between them.”

Knight has written into the narrative a family secret that connects the Cratchits to Scrooge. The secret belongs to Mrs Cratchit, played by Vinette Robinson, whose part is greatly expanded; indeed, the novella does not even grant her a first name, although the Muppets, and other adaptors, opted for Emily.

“Inevitably the secret begins to surface and cracks appear in the family,” Alwyn says. “Something has to happen. I think what Steven has done is take the story and drill deeper. He hasn’t taken too much liberty. It’s not bending the truth too much from what Dickens would have wanted. Or I hope not.”

Murphy insists that worthwhile adaptations of classic texts should be “edgy” and have “a good bite to them”. “If you absolutely don’t want any variation from the book then I strongly suggest you sit in a corner at Christmas and read it again. But if you want to see it used as a prism through which we can see a broader and slightly different subject explored, then this one’s for you.”

Alwyn’s performance is part of the iconoclasm. “Joe’s instinct as an actor is always to push away from the obvious and into ambiguity,” Murphy says. “He’s very quietly spoken. He’s not brash at all. He’s a gentle, intelligent guy, but he just simply wasn’t interested in fitting a Dickensian cliché.”

“I’ll take that,” Alwyn says when I pass on the compliment, having not considered his technique in such terms. He is 28 and would probably accept that he is best known for two facts: the first is that he is Taylor Swift’s boyfriend; the second that, aged 25 and with no professional acting experience, he won the title role in an Ang Lee movie.

He is from north London, the middle of three sons. Their father is the television documentary-maker Richard Alwyn, renowned for making The Shrine about the public reaction to Princess Diana’s death.

“He was away a bit,” Alwyn says. “He made quite a lot of films in Africa when I was growing up. He was often in Uganda, Rwanda at one point, South Sudan. So he’d come back with stories and artefacts from all over the place. He made a great documentary in Liverpool during the World Cup about two kids on an estate growing up there.”

His mother, Elizabeth, is a psychotherapist. So, I say, although his family were comfortably off and he was sent to the fee-paying City of London School, he knew something of other people’s lives?

“All different kinds of people, all different kinds of stories,” he says. “Obviously, she couldn’t share them with me in the same way that Dad could, but both their jobs take an interest in other people and are about how to empathise, understand, and listen to stories and tell stories. I suppose it’s not a million miles away from an actor’s job; listening to other people, understanding them, trying to tell stories.”

I ask about the contemporary political resonances of A Christmas Carol. I cite the wealth of certain members of his profession and of Swift’s. Only the other day I have read that she has a private jet so she can visit Alwyn on a whim. He promises me that 99.9 per cent of what the press write about them is false, and this is an example.

I ask if he finds it embarrassing.

“Find what embarrassing?”

The disparity between the amount some people earn and the wages of workers in, say, Amazon fulfilment centres.

“I saw something in The Guardian the other day, I think, saying that the top six richest people in the UK accumulate the same amount of wealth as the poorest 13 million. I think that was the figure,” he says.

And politics today?

“It’s bigger than Scrooge, but it’s the same thing amplified; not being able to see beyond yourself, building walls, cutting yourself off from other countries. If there was ever a story to counter that, featuring someone who epitomises that and then who remembers who he is as a human being, it is A Christmas Carol.”

Unlike the young Dickens, Alwyn was not a boy to stand on a table and sing and dance. As a child he auditioned to play Liam Neeson’s son in the Richard Curtis film Love Actually, but didn’t get it. He harboured ambitions to act, but pursued them only later at the University of Bristol, where he took plays up to the Edinburgh Fringe. One night he acted before an audience of one: the writer’s mother. Undeterred, he went on to the Royal Central School of Speech and Drama, joining the scramble at the end to find an agent. Weeks later, his new agent rang to say that Ang Lee was working on a new film, Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, and wanted to see an audition tape.

“I got some mates to film me in a lunch break and then my dad filmed another scene, and we got a call that night saying, ‘He wants to meet you this weekend. He’s saying, we’re going to put you on a plane and take you out of school. Come for the weekend. Learn these scenes.’ ”

As Billy, a young US Marine fêted for killing an enemy assailant in Iraq, Alwyn was painfully believable; a virgin solider returning home to be exploited for an act that had devastated him. The film did not do well, mainly because it was shot at a hyper-reality frame rate that few cinemas had the technology to show, but Alwyn was on his way.

“Things only evolve by change and people taking risks,” he says. “And Ang Lee is someone who I admire for that. None of his films are the same. Maybe thematically they draw on the same things, but he’s always pushing the boundaries.”

The same can be said for A Christmas Carol and, even more, about Yorgos Lanthimos’s The Favourite, in which Alwyn appeared alongside Emma Stone and Olivia Colman. It applies less so to his other recent films, Mary Queen of Scots, Boy Erased and now Harriet, a faithful biopic about the slave liberator Harriet Tubman in which he played a slave owner’s son. What he has managed to do consistently is work and learn from some seriously good actresses — Colman, Stone, Saoirse Ronan and Cynthia Erivo. “I know. I am targeting them,” he jokes.

I tell him my daughters have insisted I ask if he minds Swift writing songs about him (whole albums, actually, but check out London Boy if you are in search of a little cringe). “No, not at all. No. It’s flattering.”

Does it matter to him that the press — it’s a bit metatextual this, I admit, for I’m probably doing the same thing — make it obvious that they are as interested in his girlfriend as they are in him? “I just don’t pay attention to what I don’t want to pay attention to,” he explains tolerantly. “I turn everything else down on a dial. I don’t have any interest in tabloids. I know what I want to do, and that’s this, and that’s what I am doing.”

The boyf, described only the other day as “mysterious” in one of those tabloids, is no mystery at all. He knows what he wants for Christmas, and it is the career he is already forging.

A Christmas Carol begins on BBC One at 9pm on Sunday

[harrietvane]

do you mind talking about why you dislike Love Actually and Richard Curtis's romcoms? I've seen you mention it in some of your tags and I'd love to hear your thoughts :)

Long post, so scroll now, ye who care not.

OK, so like better voices than mine have articulated Why Love Actually Sucks Balls, but you were kind enough to ask for my view, so strap in I’m gonna talk about Jane Eyre, and the 1990’s Fran Drescher sitcom The Nanny also. It’s coming up on western civilisations’ holiday season, so why not, it’s a good time to tell this movie to choke, because it’s about to be repeatedly thrust upon us once again. (Disclaimer: I acknowledge Richard Curtis is responsible for Blackadder and Vicar of Dibley, so whatever else, we’re still cool on that basis. But I have spite and to spare, so there’s plenty to go around).

My main beef is actually the context. Technically, if all of the below bullshit was in an offbeat movie from any other movie market (I’m thinking maybe a French, or Spanish movie from the 90′s boom, Almodovar style?), the focus would probably be a black humour take on ‘Lord What Fools These Mortals Be!’, sort of look at the inherent ridiculousness of mankind, and how we get in our own way, blah blah, might have been cute. I’d buy that. This movie? A british movie for the american market? It’s sold with a big holiday sticker on it saying ‘ROMANCE’, and specifically ‘ADORABLE ASPIRATIONAL ROMANCE THAT YOU SHOULD ADORE AND ASPIRE TO’. Also the context *inside* the movie itself (through a narration voiceover no less) is that all of these narratives is somehow proof that ‘Love, Actually is all around’, and specifically in a good, wholesome, happy way, overall at least. These stories are redeeming, even if they’re not all happy, they’re Good™ or whatever. The context outside the movie is the same: british TV advertising, hard copy packaging, holiday specials, outdoor gala screenings: they all say over and over: THIS IS SQUISHY HOT PINK NEON LOVE, wholesome, healing, and healthy. You should want this, aspire to this, think this is the cat’s pyjamas! It’s a wide and varied look at the beautiful power of love from all angles, comic, tragic, the lot. 

Is it fuck. The ‘positive’ romance stories range from Stage-5 Creeper to Crotch Puppet Afterthought, the ‘melancholy’, thwarted romance stories seem to say ‘if you’re a woman who’s not readily/immediately bangable to your allocated straight dude, romance is over for you I’m afraid’. Let’s recap, shall we:

Much has already been said about Andrew Lincoln’s character BLANTANTLY SHARKING ON HIS BEST MATE’S WIFE being uhhh, less than fresh. I don’t even feel like I need to justify this one, it’s so over-the-top. The main point is that movie itself maintains this as a tragic, swoony, thwarted, heart-string-tugging missed connection, rather than The Worst Friend Ever (meaning: it assumes we’ll be 100% onboard with Keira Knightley skipping secretly away from Chiwetel Eijiofor to grant his best mate one treasured kiss, as opposed to saying ‘what the FUCK Mark, why are you telling me this, this is super inappropriate?? and my only wedding video is just you zooming in on my face? Pls get help’.

We all love National Treasure Colin Firth and all, but like is Love, Actually fixating on a woman who literally can’t speak to you? Has said nothing understandable to you? About whose own life you’ve never yet, and could never have asked about? Whose main interactions with you have been to wordlessly clean your room, bring you food, and tidy it away after? Your ideal woman, who you meet immediately following a break up, is one who silently meets all your domestic needs, while making zero emotional or intellectual demands on you whatsoever? WOW, SHOCKER. (Oh but it’s cute or whatever, they have him propose, and there’s a mix up when her sister appears, but she’s Ugly™, so it’s funny that the sister is not getting romance. I mean, how could she, an uggo?? Classic joke. Good times.)

The Prime Minster and his tea lady: more on Curtis’ Domestic Servitude Kink below, whoo boy.

Laura Linney would really really like to sleep with Rodrigo Santoro, and god bless her who wouldn’t, but she is tragically unable to, because she has family commitments as being the sister – not even fulltime carer, just RELATED TO -  a brother living with disability. Sorry folks, romance is OFF THE CARDS, FOREVER for Laura here. How can she??? That’s the nature of love, actually. Can you have sex right now this moment? No? Whelp, sorry, thanks for playing, back to the Tragic Assisted Living facility for you. Gosh it’s unfortunate that’s a truth universally acknowledged that any whiff of disability = no romance for you ever. (Don’t start me on 4 Weddings* [edit: *it’s totally Notting Hill, not 4 Weddings, thank] and how that husband is like The Best because he continues to love his wife even though her legs don’t work. What a champ, honestly, do they have an award for that?) I have to stop now before I get sarcasm poisoning, but my eyes will continue to roll.

How could I say anything bad about the Liam Neeson widower and his adorable lovestruck son storyine? Lol, I’m gonna. Have you seen the Buffy episode The Zeppo? Xander is convinced the only way girls (as a concept, not in the specific) will like him enough to sleep with him is if he has A Thing. The Thing is posited as ‘being cool’ by having an object or skill that alone will be the magic bullet to romance. Musical instrument prowess is considered, and he ends up just getting a car to be his Thing. This just seems like a redux of that logic. This kid could get some genuine direction from the movie to get to know this girl, learn her interests and share his, see if she likes him as a person by being A PERSON, but the narrative just backs away from that and eventually DOES just say ‘play the drums in the show, she’ll like you’ and that’s …it. But it’s cool, teenagers don’t learn key interpersonal dynamics at this age or anything, she kisses him for some reason, whatever. (Bonus points for gifting his dad with a literal supermodel as a punchline, after making that an actual joke earlier about the shallow nature of attraction, and love is about filling a one-sided need.)

I could go on, but I have very little to say about Freeman falling for a girl whose tits he’s been holding for a week, the no-homo pop star Nighy plot, or the guy that goes and has sex in Wisconsin with Bond Girls, and can’t be bothered, which leads me to…

Richard Curtis’ Domestic Servitude Kink. Must I kinkshame Richard Curtis in his own home?? Nope, I’m kinkshaming him AT WORK in his narratives, surrounded by his nubile, pliant, adorable female employee characters. Oh Mr Curtis, I seem to have dropped a pencil!

OK, so like a M/F Domestic Servitude romance is an extremely old trope, and extremely common, and I’m not here to tear that up, because done well it’s amazing, lot of petrol in that King Cophetua narrative tank. I’m a fan. The most famous in-context historical example being Jane Eyre, for instance: he’s her boss, she’s his paid subordinate, they’re both 100% aware of that. It’s a great way to explore the real-life class and power dynamics of these 2 train wrecks of human beings, and they vomit their ridiculous drama llama feelings all over a 600 page novel. Super fun, they’re both awful humans, I love them. Mid-century you might have The Sound of Music, and in more modern times you get 1990s sitcom The Nanny, both extremely well-developed romances involving paid employees, and part of their value is that the shows KNOW THIS. They’re aware it’s the basis for their dynamic, that they have to directly play with that, and develop beyond to go anywhere. Watching Fran Fine in her runway-fresh Moschino minidresses jump on Maxwell Sheffield’s desk for the 800th time making him super uncomfortable (and not a little turned on) is always such a treat. It’s right out there on the label. The problem with Love, Actually, is Curtis doesn’t want to admit that naughty secretary seems to be a cornerstone of what gets him going, romantic-stylez. 

One (1) time in the movie would be ‘sure, why not’. Literally the highest political office in the land, making overtures to the woman who brings him tea, i guess might be a bit off, but let’s say it’s done well, and maybe Hugh Grant and Martine McCutcheon’s charisma gets us over the line (his behaviour is cute because her last man didn’t like her body, but the prime minister DOES like her body! so it’s cute!). Whatever, seen worse. Two (2) times however is making a point, and Colin Firth is driving his silent portuguese maid home - not a french maid but so close! - and deciding he’d like her to bring him tea and clean his toilet for as long as they both shall live, and that also seems to be her greatest joy. Ah, l’amour. OK, I guess you like the thing, everyone has a thing, but at least you’re done now. Wait, you mean there’s a third (3rd) one? Everyone’s Fave Alan Rickman drives the plot of his own marriage’s tragic romance because he’s having stiffening feelings about his own Naughty Secretary halloween costume, after all. All the beautiful speeches about Joni Mitchell give Thompson some nice things to do, but it still assumes the Nature of Romance is to want to plough the help. A man can’t help it! It’s how romantic attraction works! Once would be whatever. Three times and there’s a tag on Ao3 for that, so please just scratch that itch and stop selling it to me in a heartwarming christmas movie as the Universal Nature Of Romance, so varied, so vast, the full spectrum! Just 2 hours to tell a story: but 3 whole narratives and 7 actors devoted to the variants on the naughty maid story. My point is be upfront about it and I’d be all for it - pretend it’s not A Thing You’re Doing and my creep-meter goes ping. Steven Shainberg’s ‘Secretary’ has a scene where the boss literally puts a saddle on his employee, and I find it to be one of the most genuinely moving romances I’ve ever seen. Love Actually makes me feel like Curtis is sending me a ‘u up?’ late night text about his secretary fantasy.

Anyway, I fucking hate this film, and not necessarily because of the content, but because of the context. The movie tells me to love it as aspirational romance. My culture tells me to love it as aspirational romance. Everyone tells me to love it as a varied and full exploration of reasons to get up in the morning, because it’s an aspirational romance. It makes me want to claw my own face off.

[minaminokyoko]

Deadpool 2: A Spoilertastic Review

One thing I've noticed over the years is that there's nothing like it when someone busts their ass to make a movie happen, defying all odds, and pours their sweat, blood, tears (and in Deadpool's case, probably other fluids we don't want to know about) into a film, and it turns out to reward them spectacularly. Deadpool was one of those movies. They fought for years to get that movie made after the disgraceful ruination of the character in X-Men Origins: Wolverine and they did him justice beyond words. It was magnificently done. It damn near beat Jesus, for fuck's sake. Actual Jesus.

And that's why I think that I don't like the sequel as much.

I've seen this happen many times: a sleeper hit or an unexpected smash hit blockbuster exceeds all expectations and then puts out a sequel. Well, unfortunately, sometimes success can ruin your party. Success, accolades, and the second highest grossing Rated R film of all time had an influence on how Deadpool 2 turned out, if you ask me. When you're not starving for it, then it means that sometimes punchlines don't land as hard, writing is not as tight, and scenes aren't as memorable. When you're already fat and happy, sometimes your motivation to make the best thing ever is just servicable at best.

I think Deadpool 2 is an enjoyable movie, but I think it didn't want it as badly as the first movie did because it was already fat, happy, and satisfied from the first film. Thus, I think they didn't try as hard to make it the best movie possible. It's still a good movie, but it can't compete with the first film by any stretch, and I'll explain why. Naturally, spoiler alert.

Overall Grade: B-/C+

Pros:

-Deadpool himself is still funny, even if the change in tone puts a damper on a lot of the enjoyment.

-Domino shines like a freaking diamond. I already like Zazie Beetz from what I saw of her in FX's show Atlanta, so I was jazzed when they announced her for the role. She still blew my expectations out of the water. I had never seen her do a physical role before, and she absolutely sold me. I'd love to see her in sequels and I sure as hell would watch a spin off of her with other female heroes should the Deadpool franchise get to borrow some X-Men in what I pray will someday be a collaborative effort between Fox and Marvel Studios. She's fantastic. She's the black girl magic the world needs to know about, and I'm so happy studios are coming around realizing black women are a massive untapped source of awesome in superhero films. For the longest time, Storm was all we had and she was weaksauce due to poor writing, but we've slowly been seeing more inclusion with the women of Black Panther and Valkyrie from Ragnarok and now Domino. Keep 'em coming, superhero movies. Black women deserve to conquer the genre and usher in other women of color alongside them.

-The X-Men pulling the door shut gag was top notch. Kudos. Even though it raises some seriously weird questions timeline-wise, I howled. That was brilliantly addressed, especially since it's so painfully obvious in the first movie that Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead were all Fox's stingy ass wanted to spare for poor Mr. Pool.

-Dupinder is still fucking adorable and precious and I'm glad he got his moment of glory.

-The Juggernaut getting a second shot was absolutely fantastic. I was trying to guess who it would be and then I saw that helmet and I might as well have done a fucking T-Rex roar in my seat the theater. Juggernaut was done right. He was everything I dreamt he would be ever since that disappointing appearance in X-Men 3. Don't get me wrong--Vinnie Jones had the right attitude, but making him just regular size guy defeats the whole purpose of why he's so unstoppable and terrifying. He literally ripped Deadpool in half. That was awesome, as was his grudge match with Colossus. I loved them going toe to toe with each other. It was staged extremely well. Aside from Domino, Juggernaut vs. Colossus was by far my favorite part of the film.

-Minor point, but I loved Deadpool's reaction to Yukio. He seemed genuinely charmed by her and vice versa and it was fucking adorable.

-The second post credits scene is exactly as good as the hype made it out to be. Oh God. Deadpool shooting Barakapool several times was just...I mean, it was the cherry on top of the sundae. It was so satisfying, as was the joke about shooting himself before he could star in Green Lantern. I love that Ryan Reynolds was so self aware that he severely fucked up his career from pretty much 2011 until 2016 when he finally got Deadpool made. He knew this movie was the only way he'd ever get himself out of that ditch in his career and I think it was a worthy redemption for sure. I also am so relieved they undid Vanessa's death, because that's the second biggest con I have for this movie as you'll see below.

-The Logan reference had me in stitches. It was so wrong, but so damn funny.

-The "blink and you'll miss it" Brad Pitt cameo. Fuck, that was amazing and surprising, thank you.

-The other "blink and you'll miss it" Alan Tudyk cameo. Holy shit, does Disney really like this man. I am so happy to see Wash getting some really great roles over the years. He's doing great.

Cons:

-Stuffing Vanessa in the Fridge. Alright, so technically I shouldn't put this in here because Deadpool fixes it in the end credits, but it pisses me off that they even attempted this stupid fucking trope. I am tired of dead girlfriends and dead wives used for Mangst. Fucking. Stop. It. Women are just as valid as men as characters. Stop killing them just to make the hero turn Super Saiyan. It's possible to still motivate the male motherfuckers without killing the girl and putting them on a revenge spree or depression spiral. It's lazy writing and all of Hollywood needs to move on from this tired ass trope. Vanessa was extremely charming, funny, and likable in the first Deadpool movie and Morena Baccarin is and has always been so wonderful to enjoy on screen in her dramatic and comedic work. I am so pissed off they Fridged her to only be in five minutes of the fucking movie. They shouldn't have even bothered putting her in the damned credits because she was only there for such a short period. If she didn't have time to film the movie, fine, just find another excuse that she's not there. Morena deserved better, dammit.

-Changing the tone of the film franchise from a screwball comedy to an action "movie" with jokes in it. This is the biggest reason I didn't like this movie as much as the first Deadpool movie. The first Deadpool movie is arguably a parody of superhero films. It takes most of the tropes and pokes fun at them in a really great way, but it also still manages to be a legit, streamlined revenge love story. It strikes the exact tone we'd all been craving ever since we heard the Deadpool movie would be greenlit. So why the fuck is the sequel written like an X-Men movie, but with more jokes? I hate the serious tone. I hate Wade moping over Vanessa, I hate the whole "family" bullshit that is spoken with a straightface somehow despite being almost as unearned as that hideous one in Suicide Squad, I hate Cable moping over his dead family, and I hate the "you're not my friend" bullshit between Wade and the incredibly annoying fat kid whose name I refuse to learn because he irritated me so much. Why did they play it all straightfaced? Why was I expected to see a "real story" in a Deadpool movie? The entire reason I like this franchise and haven't seen an X-Men film (not counting Logan) in years is because the X-Men franchise has completely played itself out. It's substandard acting, substandard writing, it doesn't adapt the comics the way it should, and it's just repetitive. All the movies since First Class are the same. The prequel babies are finally going to just end the charade with Dark Phoenix and I think most of the world is relieved because they have nothing creative or new to offer any longer. Deadpool 2 reeks of that same kind of lame writing and execution. There was no reason to switch the format. I pray to God they go back to formula in X-Force or Deadpool 3. I hate this change with a passion.

-The fat kid is annoying as hell. There, I said it. Fight me if you must. He had no sense of self preservation and the movie didn't go into enough detail to make me care about him in spite of how teeth-grindingly stupid and obnoxious he was. He was written like a twelve year old boy writing fanfiction about himself and Deadpool becoming best buds and fighting crime together. No. No, stop that right now. I don't want any part of it. I get the "he's just a kid" thing but the kid is an asshole and even if he's somehow justified, he's a pain in the ass to watch from start to finish. I also think the kid needs some acting lessons, but that's not entirely his fault. I think he probably just wasn't directed all that well, so I can let that slide, but I did notice it during the film.

-I don't care about Cable. Cable and Deadpool are righteous as fuck in the comics. In this movie? No. This is why I was against Josh Brolin being cast. He has no chemistry with Ryan Reynolds. I get that Cable is the Straight Man to Deadpool's Kooky Man, but they don't gel together at all. I never sensed any bonding even though they are setting it up for franchise reasons. He's just not interesting and he plays the role as blandly as he does all his boring ass biopics and other bland roles. Brolin worked much better as Thanos than he did Cable. Thanos had weight and was threatening and even though his reasoning was utter bullshit, at least he was convicted. Brolin's Cable just felt like some stock stoic character thrown in there as the minor antagonist. I still would have much preferred Liam Neeson or Ron Perlman, and yes, I understand both of them are getting up there in years, but we've seen older actors still kick ass and be in shape, so I think they could have done it if they were offered the part. Brolin is still one of the most drab actors I've ever seen and he just doesn't pull the role off, imo.

-The bait and switch with the X-Force team. This is a minor note for me, as I don't have a background with these characters so it's more for people who know these characters elsewhere and were expecting an awesome team up movie but that's not what they got. Are the gruesome deaths kind of funny? Yeah, sure, but it's kind of rude to advertise them that way and they're not in the movie. I just frown on it. It's not a dealbreaker. It was just disappointing in the same way that the Mandarin in Iron Man 3 was disappointing. I expected more and I got a farce instead.

-I don't know if it's for legal reasons, but it drives me crazy that we still didn't get a Wolverine cameo from Hugh Jackman. I mean, we finally got Deadpool--the real one--and I just want him and Ryan to share the screen again because even though Origins was trash, they were magical together.

-Deadpool's last "death" went on way too long. I was checking my watch. They really should have pulled the trigger on that gag. It was exhausting and not very funny to begin with.

-Negasonic Teenage Warhead getting reduced to an extra pissed me off. She was so great in the first movie and she doesn't get to do anything here and it irks the hell out of me.

-Aside from The Juggernaut vs. Colossus, the fight scenes weren't nearly as creative, cinematic, or memorable as the first film. I've already forgotten everything except the JvC fight and the convoy rescue scene. That's a bummer for me.

-The movie just isn't as funny as the first film. It's not the same kind of tight writing with excellent punchlines and ridiculous phrases that made me remember them. It's been a few days and I don't recall any insults or lines that stuck with me. I'll likely be seeing it again for Memorial Day weekend, but I still don't expect I'll remember much from it.

-Nitpick: God, I still want to push T.J. Miller off a bridge. He is not funny and never has been.

-Nitpick: WHY HAS NO ONE MADE A FIREFLY JOKE ABOUT MORENA BACCARIN AFTER TWO FUCKING DEADPOOL MOVIES?! COME ON. DEADPOOL IS ALL ABOUT NERD REFERENCES. GODDAMMIT MENTION FIREFLY YOU FUCKS. (But to be fair, this could also be because Fox is the reason we only got one season and so maybe they were forbidden from doing it. Still. That pisses me the hell off. Especially since Ryan Reynolds and Nathan Fillion (1) have both played the Green Lantern and (2) were on a sitcom with each other for years. Inexcusable.)

I'm sorry it sounds like I'm shitting on the movie. Really, it's enjoyable. I just think that maybe the first movie set the bar so high I can't help but feel frustrated by the sequel not trying as hard. Based on the online reactions, I'm on my own so...take that as you will, friends. Kyo out.

[nehswritesstuffs]

2018 Movies in Review

So my boyfriend and I go to the movies quite a bit. How much is that? Well, enough to remind our family and friends that we met in film school. Here is our stupidly-long list of things we’ve seen at the theater in 2018, from the local art house to blockbusters, shorts and features, and much more. Yay having a writing blog so I can actually have a goal for compiling this sort of thing~

~**~The following is simply my opinion as I stand, and will probably differ from your own. This is not a good thing or bad thing, just a thing, nothing more. Please take nothing personally~**~

The Post: Another movie from the previous year to start a new one, as this didn’t quite fit into our schedule before. Disturbingly topical given the political backdrop of January, let alone all of 2017. Basically the story of how the Washington Post came to get a hold of the Pentagon Papers during the lead up to the Watergate Hotel Scandal, grew some balls of journalistic integrity, and defied a bully who was sitting in the Oval Office. I honestly expect to have something similar happen to the bully who is currently in the Oval Office, but I highly doubt it at this rate. (I looked over this summary in late December and yes I still hope that there are some journalists out there allowed to get some balls and fully defy the Bully in Chief, but okay whatever.)

The Commuter: People really need to stop stealing Liam Neeson’s family. Don’t you know that if you kidnap Liam Neeson’s family, you and a bunch of other people get dead and/or arrested? Good to see Elizabeth McGovern doing something that doesn’t involve Downton Abbey as well.

Mary and the Witch’s Flower (subbed): Super-cute and super-fun. Basically, a girl gets turned into a witch on accident and she ends up needing to fix a thing or else the villains win; basic fare, but done well enough to where you don’t care. It’s a good babysitting movie, and I hope to see more things out of Studio Ponoc in the near future. Who are they? It’s a breakoff studio related to Studio Ghibli (the people behind Spirited Away, Ponyo, and My Neighbor Totoro, to name a few), and that being said, it is very, very clear that’s what was going on from the studio’s title card to the art direction and storytelling. I don’t know any of the politics or reasoning behind the split, but I assume it’s a friendly and mutually-agreed upon deal considering how clear the connections are.

Paddington 2: This franchise is basically everything all the current adaptations of children’s books and revamping of other family-friendly properties wants to be, but cannot because this is the only one that seems to purely meld the concepts of modernization and keeping with the original spirit. That being said, I enjoyed every moment of this movie. Scruffy PCap as Mr. Curry is still incredibly unfair, and I hope that if there is a third movie (there better be a third movie), that in it he gets a nicer role than a commentary on Brexit and populism. I wouldn’t say it is the absolute best movie of 2018, as I don’t have a singular movie to put forward that clearly beats out the competition, but it is certainly on my shortlist for best movies of 2018.

Early Man: I did not realize I was going into a sports movie, but I loved it anyhow. Even though I don’t have an encyclopedic knowledge of soccer-football as I might have with other sports or things, but I still found the entire movie to be entertaining and highly hilarious, because I know **just enough** to get it. I think the people here in the States who reviewed the movie and didn’t like it knew little to nothing about soccer-football and therefore the jokes fell flat. It was a cute movie though, and I enjoyed the Stone/Bronze Age juxtapositions. Definitely a worthy installment to the Aardman library.

Black Panther: One of the best movies I have ever seen, by far. Like, this ranks right up there with Dunkirk and The Shape of Water from last year’s list, and definitely out-does any other live-action superhero movie I’ve seen to-date (this includes a later stewing-over after watching Infinity War, Ant Man and the Wasp, and Venom). Why? It was visually stunning, taking and utilizing aesthetics and design features rarely seen with such prominence in a film of this magnitude; was cared for on multiple levels when it comes to the writing, acting, producing, and directing; and it really was able to raise horrific historical points (African-American slavery and not only their systematic oppression, but the plight of Black Africans and their descendants in general) while not letting it control the narrative with a sense of vengeance, instead ultimately preaching peace and unity despite, and in order to overcome, the sins of the past, applying it to Wakandan history as well. The characters were strong and relatable, their motivations were believable and in some cases seriously flawed, and their interactions were great fun to watch unfold. This is really a movie that I think everyone should see, no matter one’s nationality or ethnicity, simply because of how it visually opens a plethora of possibilities in not just superhero and action movies, but respectful storytelling devices of African roots to a Western audience that has largely ignored such things (for good, benign, or bad, it’s a group of cultures that have been ignored or hacked at in various forms). Plus it was just a really good and fun movie that can be watched again and again without there being any sort of fatigue.

2018 Oscar Nominated Short Films

Animated

While I would have preferred if Revolting Rhymes had won (being that it was very funny and clever), I’m not bothered at all by Dear Basketball taking the tiny statue instead, being that it was very touching and heartfelt. Negative Space had a great punchline, Lou was adorable as per Pixar law, and Garden Party gave me the money shot promised to me by the “disturbing imagery” warning that the theater incessantly provided. (The emcee dude literally said “they’re French; they can’t help themselves”, though it was very loving in nature.)

Live-Action

All of these deserved a nomination, but my least-favorite was the one that won. The Silent Child, being about the struggles of a deaf child, was very well-done and conveyed its point well, but it wasn’t jiving with me like the others. That being said, I’m not entirely sure which should have won. Dekalb Elementary was very intense and a great example of limited settings and use of real-time editing. My Nephew Emmett, being the story of Emmett Till as told from the perspective of his great-uncle, showed a very terrifying situation for a black family from the American South in the 1950s, all the way to including ACTUAL FOOTAGE of the uncle himself from after the incident (which itself is a reminder of how broken and misguided the justice system has been and can be). The Eleven O’ Clock was just pure funny and a good break in the seriousness of everything else (serious can be good, but being the fourth of five screen shorts, this provided much-needed relief). Finally, Watu Wote/All of Us made me cry. I had never heard of the situation the short was about, and stories about people caring for one another because it’s simply the kind thing—let alone the right thing—to do always seem to get me going.

A Wrinkle in Time: IT TRIED TO OUT-SPARKLE THOR RAGNAROK AND IT MAY HAVE SUCCEEDED, PERSONAL MILEAGE DEPENDANT. Having never read the book, I had no idea what I was going into, but my boyfriend had and said that he was perfectly content with the changes made. The visuals were stunning, the Missuses’ costumes were incredible, the acting was great from everyone involved, and go Gugu go, you mack on Captain Kirk! *smacked* I’m actually really glad that they made this now instead of thirty years ago, because even though there were really good special effects in the 1980s, this is precisely the sort of movie we need to have done now, with 2018’s brand of special effects, because it brings a whole other dimension that would have otherwise been impossible unless done entirely in animation, but I doubt that the network/studio executives would have allowed a 1980s version of Storm Reid be the lead of a show/movie like that, ‘cause, you know… stuff. Plus, it might’ve just ended up looking like the Ewok cartoon, so I think that’s a blessing in disguise right there.

Annihilation: Was a bit wary of this one at first due to the trailer making it look more like a straight horror movie, but my boyfriend kinda eased me into it and I’m glad he did. It is most definitely science-fiction with minor horror elements. The little gore and violence that is there is serious gore and violence, but otherwise is no scarier than a scary episode of Doctor Who, but with a few droppings of the word fuck. It’s just as mindscrewy as a really good episode of Doctor Who can be as well (so, like, Classic at the bottom of the writers’ give-a-shit-about-the-BBC’s-controller level or even Moffatt-era), so also be forewarned on that.

Tomb Raider: I fully admit that I did not see either of the Angelina Jolie movies, nor have I played the video games, but cultural assimilation has tuned me in to the main premise of the game series: female Indiana Jones. I went in wanting that, and as it turned out, that’s what I got. Like, seriously, people who complained because it was “just” girl-Indiana Jones clearly did not know what the games were about (other than oddly-shaped anatomical polygons) and ignored how well this delivered an origin story. The boyfriend said it was easily one of the better video game movies he had seen to-date and I trust him considering he’s regularly played a whole lot more video games than me. It probably would have been better-received had this come without any Jolie movies prior to it, at least that’s what I think.

THE WORST PART OF THE MOVIE *puts weeb glasses on* WAS THE FACT NO ONE COULD FUCKING PRONOUNCE THE MACGUFFIN’S NAME WITHOUT SOUNDING LIKE UNEDUCATED SHITS. HIMIKO IS HEE-MEE-KOH, NOT HIM-EE-KOH. I CRINGED THE ENTIRE FUCKING MOVIE AT THIS, BECAUSE APPARENTLY THERE WAS NO JAPANESE-SPEAKING PERSON ON THE ENTIRE PRODUCTION STAFF. SOME OF THESE CHARACTERS ARE HIGHLY LEARNED AND KNOWLEDGABLE AND SUPPOSEDLY KNOW THEIR SHIT, BUT NOOOOO, WE NEED TO IGNORE THAT FOR UNFORSEEABLE REASONS. YOU’RE FUCKING UNFORSEEABLE, MOVIE LINGUISTS! *flips kotatsu* ‘Cause really, if Himiko’s name was supposed to have the M as the “end” of a syllable, it should more be Himuiko, which would be a different cadence altogether, and I highly doubt that’s what the filmmakers were going for there.

The Death of Stalin: Armando the Scottish Laughter Gnome has done it again. A period piece taking place in 1953 Soviet Russia, the story—as the title suggests—is about the power struggle that ensues after the death of Josef Stalin and how darkly absurd it all played out. It doesn’t take much of a background in Soviet politics to understand what’s going on, just as long as people pay attention to who is who, while understanding that the only person who could actually be considered good of the named cast is Svetlana, Stalin’s daughter (understatement if there is one). The cast is great, the jokes are morbidly hilarious at all times, and everything is chock-full of Iannucci’s style found throughout much of his other political satires. Also swearing. Tons of swearing. Fuck… now I want Armando Iannucci and Steven Moffat to team up on something. ‘Mando and Moff—you know you want it to happen.

Pacific Rim: Uprising: I was so happy when I heard that this was greenlit, and it did not disappoint when it finally got into theaters. While it was much brighter visually and clearly meant to sell toys than the first one (lookin’ at you, Mark VI Jaegers), the tone was not as violently a departure as many feared. I kind of get the feeling that this will be a very fun and pulpy, delightfully cheesy, movie franchise if we can keep it going. I mean, we have John Boyega on screen… AND he’s allowed to sound British! He and Charlie Day are the biggest cast lynchpins keeping things together for the time being, as they are the biggest draws, which means I’m worried about their desire for potential future involvement being hindered in some way. What I do know, however, is that it was very nice having plenty of scenes with Boyega and Scott Eastwood together because dang they are two good-looking men. (Which it’s weird to me that Boyega as Finn in Star Wars is little-brother-cute, while as Jake Pentecost he makes me feel kinda bad I’m majorly ogling while sitting next to my boyfriend.)

As far as the franchise will be concerned, I hope it shall be—at least to me—what the Land Before Time franchise became, but in a good way. Anyone who saw the original movie knows that although it was a kids’ movie, it was very dark and violent and frank about some heavy shit. On the other hand, anyone who saw the home-release-only sequels know that they were anything but that, essentially being lighter-toned fare that is also easily described as fan fiction gone horrifically wrong, even if you’re lucky enough to have a nostalgia filter on. My hopes for Pacific Rim is that the future installments are able to take the sequelitis risks into consideration and keep adjusting as things go along, making sure they don’t fall into a throw-that-garbage-in type of rut because they can’t think of anything else.

Isle of Dogs (half subs, because that’s how it rolls): Another excellent example of how animation in American cinema can be utilized to create a story that is not entirely kid-friendly, but because it’s a movie with talking dogs it’s viewed by the public as children’s fare. It was rather violent and graphic (injuries, gore, filth, abuse of humans and dogs), yet people STILL brought their small children to see it. The youngest people in the theater with us should have been the young teens who dragged grandpa to the movies, not the preschooler who kept asking loud questions such as “Did the doggy die” and “Why are they eating white worms”. Those were maggots, kid. Sleep tight!

Rampage: Apparently 2018 is the Year of Good Video Game Movies, because they made a multiplayer version of Trogdor the Burninator (yes, I know Rampage predated Trogdor; humor me) into a movie with an actual plot despite the fact it very precisely knew the audience was there to watch these mutant fuck-up creatures destroy Chicago. Who wouldn’t want to watch a bunch of mutant fuck-up creatures destroy Chicago? (Don’t answer that.) It was surprisingly raunchy in a couple parts, really fun and funny in general, and didn’t push my Rock Threshold towards Rock Bottom. He’s a really fun guy, but he’s been in a ton of stuff lately and I can understand how that might grate on people. I still can’t imagine him as a loner dude who isn’t necessarily weird but still gets along with animals better than people, but whatever. Any plot and characterizations were all subservient to the premise anyhow… which is, again, still really fun.

Avengers: Infinity War: I’m very disappointed that this ended up being the [live-action] superhero movie event of the year instead of Black Panther, but sometimes you have to just sit there and take it. Well, “sit there and take it” was essentially how I kind of approached watching the movie. Like, fuck, that was depressing. Over two fcking hours of despressing. I just… dang. I don’t even know how they’re going to write their way out of this, since I read significantly more Japanese comics than American ones, therefore having no idea as to what’s coming. (Boyfriend covers that part, and he says it’s all okay, so I trust him… kinda…) Whatever it coming next, it better be leagues happier than this because otherwise this is just bullshit.

Solo: A Star Wars Story: or, in my mind: HAN AND LANDO IN THE MOOOOORNING! Not entirely sure why it was a supposed flop, because it was generally fun and funny while not making the serious bits seem weird. The only thing that really made me roll my eyes was L3-37, but that was made up for with the fact that we only had to suffer her for a wee bit (she felt really out-of-place otherwise). Now I want to see a Solo movie that takes place post-Original Trilogy that has Leia and Qi’ra getting a designated girl fight. Yes, I actually want a designated girl fight to happen essentially over a boy. It actually could be quite funny in this particular instance, if handled well, and I would trust Ron Howard with such a task. CAN BEN HAVE AN OLDER HALF-SIBLING THANKS TO HAN AND QI’RA? THAT WOULD BE NICE; THANKS IN ADVANCE, OPIE. I HAVE FAITH IN YOU.

Doctor Who: Genesis of the Daleks: Neither my boyfriend nor I had watched this storyline yet, so when it came to the theater it was an extra-special treat (complete with before and after stuff with Tom Baker himself! (The post-show interviewer did make me want to punch something though)). What’s always interesting about watching Classic Doctor Who in a movie-style format is how smoothly everything progresses compared to needing two minutes of repeat footage from the previous “week”, as that was how it genuinely had to be done. Anyhow, it was good to see an adventure with Sarah Jane, Harry, and Four together where they were comfortable with one another (I had seen Robot, but they weren’t quite there yet). Always great to see Classic!Davros as well, and wow those pants on Sarah Jane at the start of the episode looked like a badly-hemmed skirt. This is why we shouldn’t have Thirteen in floods—flared or not—if they didn’t look right on Sarah Jane, they’re not gonna look right on ANYONE ELSE, the Doctor included.

Rifftrax: Space Mutiny: Again, the Rifftrax guys take to the screen with a bunch of new riffs to a movie they’ve already done and make it all the funnier. I approve of the GorillaGram’s efforts to not show us Grandma-Daughter’s naughty bits, even if it was supposedly a terror in of itself. The movie is still loveably dumb and disturbingly apartheid-compliant, both of which lend well to even more jokes of varying viciousness. Plus! I don’t think I heard a single repeat Built van der Huge nickname, either from the original MST version or this one, which is pretty impressive considering the sheer fcking amount of them.

Incredibles 2: Why this was not one of the first things Pixar churned out sequel movies to, I have no idea, because it was perfectly tailored to the concept. Leaving off seconds after the end of the first one, it seamlessly goes into the Parr Family’s next adventure, one in which it’s very clear that the franchise was ahead of its time in 2004 and still is in some ways in 2018. I personally didn’t see the villain’s actual identity coming (and actually thought they were innocent with genuinely bugged work until the reveal), and was pleased at how fucking amazing everything looked. Dang, there’s definitely been an upgrade in graphics in the past fourteen years. Now we need a bunch more sequels, though not all fourteen years apart. Though do you want to know what’s weird? The first Incredibles was rather dark and had a high body count; Incredibles II often skewed darker with a body count of zero. I read some reviews that said that the sequel was lighter than the original, but I’m not entirely convinced considering how much mortal danger, villainous mind control, child endangerment, violence/peril, and overall implications there were throughout. Elastigirl may not have had that important talk with her kids about how the bad guys are willing to hurt and/or kill them despite being kids, but that’s because that was all literally laid down no more than a day in-universe before the start of this installment. Don’t be fooled by the low body count and lack of that discussion… it’s still amazingly dark for what it is and I love it all the same.

A note that needs a paragraph of its own: Edna Mode’s revelation concerning Jack-Jack is essentially what I hope for all people who don’t like, or even hate, kids. I do pray that all Kid Dislikers find the one that makes them acknowledge that not all children are [insert negative quality here] and then offer to babysit it every so often so they can have some fun but still give it back when it gets too much. Oftentimes the dislike/hatred of children is merely a case of the badly-parented ones being the most obvious examples of what a kid is for such individuals, but I totally get not wanting the specific set of responsibilities involved with raising kids despite all the fun they can be… so yeah. Edna and Jack-Jack were the bestest.

Singin’ in the Rain: They had this 1952 gem on the giant screen over at a local museum for a Throwback Thursday, which means that we got a really weird crowd… not quite Going in Style sort of crowd, but it was pretty damn close. (There was a septuagenarian semi-tap dancing on the curb before going in, I think to prove to one of the people in her group that she could still do it. That was the kind of crowd.) While not as scathing as it could have been (and I doubt we would’ve gotten that back in the 1950s), it is still personally one of my favorite throwbacks to the late 1920s, as well as my favorite bombastic Hollywood musical. It’s such a great feeling to watch this bright and peppy thing, because that’s not always the case anymore with the grimdark trend and the “real is dark/grey/brown/terrible” idea that’s still hanging out. I think to be “wholesome” and/or “bright” doesn’t mean to be sanitized or mind-numbing or not worthy of being considered art, but to be light-hearted, yet tongue-in-cheek, and refusing to bow to the cynics (or “realists”, as they might claim otherwise) and their idea of what the world is and how it should play out. So yeah… Singin’ in the Rain helps combat that, even if it can be considered part of the problem (because there are plenty of problems, possibly more than you know/want to know). It’s also probably why I like some of the other very specific movies out there this year, as they’re just as bright and cheery in tone.

Ant Man and the Wasp: So I had to go and play catchup on this one, as I hadn’t seen the first Ant Man, and that meant that the original was fresh in my mind as I saw the sequel. I think it was really fun, all things considered, things being that we always had Infinity War looming over us. Up yours, Snapocalypse. Cassie and the Wombats shall be your undoing! (I wrote the previous two sentences before the Endgame trailer was a thing, and I still stick to this assumption that Cassie and the Wombats will get to be the deciding factor.) As the internet is requesting, I too hope that we get to see Luis’s recap of events with everyone lip-syncing to it all.

Crumbs and Afronauts (both subbed): Two different movies shown together, with Crumbs being a short feature and Afronauts being a short. Crumbs, a 2015 creation by Miguel Llanso, is kinda best described as that: a creation. Set in a post-apocalyptic Ethiopia, it follows this guy on his quest to find Santa Claus, all the while there are things we know as mass-produced and cheap shit being reinterpreted as talismanic and godly. It’s a real tongue-in-cheek headtrip, I’ll tell you what. Then Afronauts, a 2014 short by Frances Bodomo, is kinda-sorta based on real events, that being there was an effort in Zambia to send a seventeen-year-old girl (Matha) and two cats to the moon before the Apollo 11 program did. It does not play out how things really happened.

Princess Mononoke (subbed): So I had kinda watched this before, during a slumber party in the mid-2000s, but it very clearly had not stuck in my very sleepy mind because holy wah that was some violent shit that I would have remembered. (We were all secondary/high school-aged teens and the parents were probably aware of what they were letting us see if I remember them correctly, so I guess we passed the test.) Extremely violent and bleak and with very few abilities to create solid sides… which really sets it apart from the rest of the Ghibli canon that I’ve seen. Moro is Best Shipper Mom who understands that her daughter wants to bang the perfect pretty dude and I am 100% behind this.

Won’t You Be My Neighbor?: Otherwise known as “the Mister Rogers documentary”, it took a very concise look at why Rev. Fred Rogers went into children’s television and what kept him so passionate about it. I grew up in the tail end of his career, very clearly remembering the second time his show ended (and being rather upset, as I had a toddler amongst my brothers who would then not have the same thing us older siblings got to have). I cried throughout the entire thing, more or less, which is pretty telling as to how heartfelt everything was.

Christopher Robin: When I first heard that “Winnie-the-Pooh, but live-action” was going to be a thing, and then that some of my faves were involved on top of that, I was very disappointed. I know it makes me sound like a film snob, but the current trend of redoing animated properties in live-action with very little, if any significant, changes is an insult to animation and movie audiences in general, reinforcing the idea that animation is for children and the childish and that only a live-action remake can possibly save it from the hell that is animation. Not everyone is convinced that is the train-of-thought behind the Disney live-action remake craze, but trust me when I say that it is very clearly a major, unspoken driving force to this animation nerd. HOWEVER, Christopher Robin does not do that. In fact, Christopher Robin is a very good example of how to make a live-action adaptation while making it a worthwhile entry in a franchise in its own right. I was very glad to see and hear favorite actors all over the place in what is very clearly a Winnie-the-Pooh installment, just in a different medium than we normally have. Like Paddington, it holds very true to the spirit of the source material, which is not something that is found very often in any remake or reboot, live-action or animated, children’s or family or adult-orientated.

Mission Impossible: Fallout: I had never watched a Mission Impossible movie before this year, which means that I had to play catch-up like for Ant Man, except I watched two extra movies instead of one (the first and fourth, which I gather are simply “the first and the best” of the franchise, since Brad Bird’s was inherently better than the first one). That being said, this series has way too big of a fixation on heights (I had to keep closing my eyes because fcking helicopter fight) and Ethan Hunt. Like, I get that most people find that heights are exciting and so I can either close my eyes or leave the room, so that’s not too big an issue, but I am not interested in Ethan Hunt whatsoever and I cannot exactly avoid that as easily. It’s really good that Mission Impossible is “James Bond, but team version” so the narrative can mosey on away from him for a while, but at the same time, Ethan feels like he still carries too much of being The Ace on his back, which is boring for someone who does not care about him. I also have to laugh whenever I see him in a frame with other people and it’s, like, they’re trying so fcking hard to make Tom Cruise look taller than he really is. We all know he is a wee, tiny man. Just let him be a wee thing; stop with perspective shots and standing on boxes/ledges. Another thing: Henry Cavill has found his wheelhouse. Either he needs to be a cold-blooded and murderous super-spy, or a literal alien. This way he doesn’t have to worry about the fact that he clearly cannot emote more than once or twice a movie (or is it now allowed? The world may never know). I wish I could say his variations on the same look that he does instead of emoting was just subtlety, but it honestly just looks like he can’t move his face and that’s kinda upsetting. It’s now MI:F, the Man from U.N.C.L.E., and the DCCU that I’ve seen him in and he just sticks to one emotion per movie and they’re all kind of a variant on the same range please don’t fight me on this.

So yeah, even though plenty of people have this on their Best of 2018 lists, I didn’t think it was all that interesting or worthy a spot on such a list.

Rifftrax: Krull: THIS WAS ACTUALLY KIND OF A FUN MOVIE??? Usually when you hear that Rifftrax is skewering something that you’ve never heard of, it’s because it really is that bad, but the very clear “we planned on doing this as sci-fi but the only element of that we kept was laser blasters and the villain is an alien from outer space” is basically-almost the aesthetic I used for my Whouffaldi nobility AU, just with a lower budget (the mind-budget is always greater than what’s available, so the costumes and sets and everything else are better in my fic, but it’s still this weird mash of “medieval Europe” tropes with some laser-punk added in).

Dr. Who and the Daleks: I still love this interpretation of the original Daleks storyline, because it very neatly compacts everything into one go without the weekly 22-min format and if anything I’m a sucker for that (see: Genesis of the Daleks earlier in this post). There’s still the fact that it changes everything just so, while still being very true to the original, even if Ian is turned into more slapstick fodder and both Barbara and Susan are the Who granddaughters. Yes, the Doctor’s surname here is Who. While this was going on thanks to Dalekmania, Whovians were being treated to knock-offs such as Krotons and Quarks, as Terry Nation took his figurative football home with him and made everyone suffer(?) because of it. I still love Peter Cushing as the Doctor, though. We need Peter Cushing as an accepted AU!Doctor in canon. We need Peter Cushing. Stop looking at me like that.

Perfect Blue (subbed): Satoshi Kon’s debut film (other works include Tokyo Godfathers, the TV show Paranoia Agent, and Paprika) it is just as much a mindscrew as one should expect. A very interesting take on pop idols, movie starlets, the inherent voyeurism and lechery that permeates the entertainment industry, and how women feel they must navigate such things; it does not surprise me that, given the subject matter, there was a distinct emphasis on what the mental costs might be down the line. I did not see the progression that the plot would take, and we even were treated to a wee interview with the late Mr. Kon after the movie. The interviewer clearly did not understand the movie in the slightest, which is always that interesting combination of sad and hilarious, and you could see a sort of sadistic exasperation on Kon’s face as he had to walk the interviewer through it all.

Jurassic Park 25th Anniversary: I did not see this when it first came out in theaters, mainly because I was four years old and my parents knew I wasn’t down for realistic dinosaurs running about. That being said, it was very neat to see this on the big screen, watching the old animatronics and early 1990s CGI. I absolutely love how the CGI stands up to the test of time, where you can see clipping against the human characters, but it really doesn’t matter because the effects are that good, up to par with movies of 2018.

Michael Jackson’s Thriller: This was in 3D at the IMAX and I was very confused as to why only this was 3D-ified and not the feature that came after it as well. It had been a while since I’d seen the Thriller music video, so I forgot a lot of how the song was different than it was in the studio version. Definitely a treat.

The House With A Clock in Its Walls: a.k.a.: The Movie That Came With Admission to Thriller. Unfortunately, this was still a Jack Black movie, and I am not a big Jack Black fan by far. I think what made it better for me was Cate Blanchett, as her acting brought things back down to okay levels. Then there was the fact that it took place in a fictional south-west Michigan town, all the way down to the kids saying “pop” for a carbonated beverage (the author of the original book was from the greater Battle Creek area, which only gives more credence to the idea of an Only Michiganders Write About Michigan trope the bf and I joked about afterwards), plus being a really dark, yet kid-friendly, romp really did help a lot.

My Neighbor Totoro (subbed): I adore this movie, I really do, yet I hadn’t seen it in Japanese until the Fathom Events’ GhibliFest. It’s still just as charming and adorable as ever, with the only thing being that I was rather put off by the fact the dad’s voice actor was so flat-toned. I understand that’s natural in Japanese, as they have fewer tones and don’t necessarily need a ton of vocal range to still give a good and natural performance according to other native speakers, but that still doesn’t mean it translates well. This is why I feel dubs are very important, because it generates what I like to refer to as the “Saiyuki Effect”, where there is a decent voice acting job in Japanese (or any other origin language) yet the English version (or any other target language) seems to give more depth and range to the character(s) involved. Why Saiyuki? It’s just Journey to the West with bishonen, yeah, but if you compare the original Japanese to the English dub, you’ve got two wildly different acting jobs… so yeah. Got the Saiyuki Effect going on in Totoro. Yup.

Venom: Going into this, I only knew that Venom was “goth-color-palette Spider-Man” and that was freaking it. What I ended up getting was a really weird take on what’s supposed to be an important Spider-Man anti-villain that proves that it actually doesn’t need Spider-Man showing up to be good…? Am I saying this correctly? I hope so. One reviewer in my local news market said that it wasn’t good because there was no Spider-Man, but, um, that was the point…? It stands alone quite well and certainly gives hope to the idea that Spidey’s rogues gallery can finally get their times in the spotlight too without Sony and MARVEL pitching giant hissy fits at one another (which I still don’t rule out, but whatever). I, for one, look forward to the potential variety that may come with the Venomverse, because as much fun as Batman and Superman the Justice League and Avengers are, we’ve seen a ton of them and it’s good to have a superhero canon that can potentially be devoid of either grouping.

Bad Times at the El Royale: This was really odd. Just… odd. Not in a bad way, so don’t think it’s something to ignore, but it definitely uses its actors well and takes turns I definitely did not see coming. Also rather violent, both actively and passively. You’ve got that. I was so entranced by the movie that some of the bits seemed more surreal than they should have been, which is a good thing… I guess…? It’s difficult to not talk about this movie without either spoiling the hell out of it or making it sound super-dumb by leaving out all the good bits.

First Man: On-point acting, excellent sound design, precise writing and internal timekeeping… yet I didn’t like it. Why? It’s because I knew going in that there would be some intense shaky-cam scenes due to rocket takeoffs, causing me to sit in the very back of the theater (as I often do), yet I still felt nauseous between rocket scenes because they turned off the shaky-cam for only one establishing shot that I can recall and I recall it because the steadiness was so jarring. Losing the ability to come down from the shaky-cam bits was very off-putting to me, because the movie was such an intense and emotional ride that the Earth scenes needed to be very “grounded”, and cinematically a good way to do that is via use of tripods and other stable rigs when filming instead of handing it to someone on set and telling them to stand still. Sometimes the hand-held effect of the shaky-cam works in other things set in mundane, earthen places! Normally it’s meant to induce a feeling of intimacy and intrusion, as though these are moments where in the real world, no one speaks of it unless it’s been forty years and almost everyone’s dead, or that the footage is valid yet it is also filmed very organically, with the action spilling out everywhere and the camera crew “attempting” to catch it all. However, this isn’t a 22-minute episode of a TV show, or even 45 minutes, but a nearly two and a half hour long experience, and although it was a stylistic choice to include all the shaky-cam, I find it to be a very poor choice in the overall state of things. It may not be obvious to some people, but I was almost hyper-aware of it, and so it might get to me more than others.

tl;dr: I guess it was a really good movie but I was too busy having my eyes closed to make sure I didn’t vomit all over my boyfriend and other theatergoers to actually watch instead of part-watch-part-listen due to heavy movie-induced motion sickness to pay that close attention.

Bohemian Rhapsody: I will always and forever be upset at the fact that we missed out on Cool Old Dude Freddie Mercury, so that’s probably what drew me to this film. For me, a more modern biopic needs to have some sort of performance-based draw in order to make it a better choice than a documentary or an encyclopedia entry*, and this movie was really able to nail that square on the head. Rami Malek is able to project all of Freddie Mercury’s charisma and flamboyance perfectly, which is something that you can’t properly get from just stage footage and narrated photos. Yeah, they fudged a bit when it comes to precise dates and motivations, but when going into a dramatized biopic, that assumption has to stay on the forefront of the audience’s mind anyhow, otherwise you’re setting yourself up for disappointment (see: the opening to Victoria & Abdul for the most honest biopic claim ever). I also had a fun time with just watching the cast, because it’s Cal Richards/Cutler Beckett/Simon Foster**, Goosefat Bill***, Tom Branson, and Shrek-trying-to-not-do-the-Shrek-voice running about all over the place. It’d probably be even funnier if I watch Game of Thrones or Mr. Robot, but I don’t, so whatever. I also marvel and bow down to the many illustriously gay mustaches in this, because holy shit those were Peak Gay, even if Allen Leech’s was also a mustache of evil. Speaking of, to be real (and spoilery) for a sec: one of the most repeated complaints about the movie is that it supposedly insinuates that had Freddie had stayed with Mary instead of drifting towards Paul (aka: A MAN), he’d be with us still, but I got none of that being it was clear that it was the hedonistic, drug-and-loose-sex-filled lifestyle that ultimately caught up with him (and that’s something that can do in anyone, of any gender/orientation/whathaveyou) and that had he found a stable force like Jim (or Mary, but the thing is that they’re both the order to Freddie’s chaos) instead of Paul earlier, things would potentially be different… or at least have a better grounding. So really it’s not whether or not Freddie found his ruin while with a Paul instead of a Pauline, but because he was drawn like a moth to flame towards a destructive influence that wasn’t overly concerned about his well-being, encouraging extremely reckless behavior that could have possibly gotten him killed earlier than when he died in real life.

Nutcracker and the Four Realms: This is a really cute movie and I hope it ends up faring much better in the home market than it did in theaters, because it was, again, really cute and generally harmless and doesn’t just hollow out the heart of an established and beloved franchise with dull jokes in the midst of an unnecessary rehash like SOME THINGS DO. *stares at the Gr*nch* Honestly, I feel as though due to the timing of the release (almost immediately after Halloween, when we’re in the spoop-wind-down) and the fact that it’s merely a precursor to a slew of other movies jam-packed in the November-December cinema bonanza, AND it had to compete with Bohemian Rhapsody the day it came out and the Gr*nch the week after and Fantastic Beasts/Instant Family the week after that and Ralph Breaks the Internet the week after that… it just wasn’t in a nice and dead space with no competition so it could properly catch people’s attention. I heard from someone while at work that they didn’t like it because they were “waiting for [the movie] to do something and then it ended” and I think you have to think about it as a ballet instead of an action movie… which idk why you wouldn’t do that to begin with, but whatever. Ballets don’t do shit; you just watch people dance around for a couple hours and there’s supposed to be a story to use as a backdrop but that’s ancillary to the dancing/choreographing/costumes/set stuff. What were people seriously expecting? A fight sequence worthy of the Incredibles with Bad Times at the El Royale storytelling? You looked in the wrong movie, motherflipper.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald: Did they think about what they would do in a trilogy/franchise context before naming the first Fantastic Beasts movie? Rowling did the writing herself, so I assume not. She’s not very good at managing her own ‘verse for some unknown reason, which is why I’m so fcking glad that David Yates still has directorial privilege, or else we’d probably have a massive garbage fire on our hands instead of a barely-contained blaze tearing through a mound of old tires. I generally trust him more than I do Just Kidding Rowling, which is why I even bother watching Fantastic Beasts… BUT I DIGRESS. This movie was horridly written and brings down the work of everyone else that’s involved and used their talents for good (I basically liked everything that wasn’t directly influenced by her bad writing, such as effects and creatures and design and things like that). Basically anyone who’s done a compilation of the worst of the plot-holes/fucked attempts at “diversity” has covered it fairly well, so I’ll just recommend them instead of me rehashing it in all caps (Jenny Nicholson on YouTube does the thing very well). SO basically don’t see this movie unless you either don’t care about canon and respecting things previously established in it, or if you just want to see the shitshow so that you know what Just Kidding needs to write herself out of in the next THREE MOVIES. I thought writing a surprise fantasy cycle was only for Christopher Paolini. *smacked* But no seriously I haven’t been angry at a fantasy movie since I went to go see the Eragon adaptation and that was so horrifically botched (WITH PAOLINI’S APPROVAL) that they couldn’t go on past the first book and I’m actually quite glad because this means that Ed Speelers was unequivocally free to do Downton Abbey and it looked like he had much more fun on that than Eragon. Can you tell I can’t wait until Rowling’s transformation into Female George Lucas is complete and she sells the rights to her stuff? I can’t fcking wait.

Castle in the Sky (subbed): Remember how I complained about heights further up on the bit for Mission Impossible? Yeah, I get that way with animated movies too. I do kinda miss Mark Hamill chewing the scenery when it’s not the English track, but that’s okay, since the Japanese one is pretty solid and doesn’t have much of the tonal dissonance that I’ve ranted about before.

Wreck-It Ralph 2: Ralph Breaks the Internet: You want to know what would have been really fun about this movie? NOT SEEING THE GROUP OF DISNEY PRINCESSES AND THEIR SCHTICK IN A PREVIEW FIVE MONTHS IN ADVANCE WHILE SITTING IN THE THEATER FOR THE INCREDIBLES. (Also knowing about D23 spoiling it made me sad as well.) Go ahead and have your merch ready for the day after the movie premieres, but come on now. ANYHOW, I generally thought it was very cute overall and find that anyone who doesn’t like it generally isn’t a fan of the shift from retro arcade games to the wider world of the internet, which is okay, I guess, but we are also talking about something that would end up happening sooner or later with the way technology runs (like, I hope that physical arcades run for a very long time, as that’s an experience that you cannot easily replicate, but we know which direction gaming has been going and it’s not towards places like Litwak’s). Maybe, if there’s a third movie, it would possibly involve a new game getting plugged in at the arcade, and watching the chaos that ensues from there, but then… what would a new arcade-style game be like? Some serious finagling would need to happen.

Overlord: If Krull hit one aesthetic note, then Overlord hit another. I’m not big into the zombie trend as a wholesale thing since it bored me super-quick, but give me an interesting enough setting and I’m there. Zombies aside, the movie was cast modernly (re: racially integrated paratroopers during WWII when that wasn’t a thing IRL, a fact I’m sure the cast and crew 100% understood and 1000% didn’t care about) and I think that really worked to the film’s advantage, as it was able to set up the tone well (re: not the average WWII movie made as award bait where a Nazi gets punched). Overlord gets to be a nice bloody, gory, body-horror, Nazi-killing, zombie-bludgeoning romp where I’m also shipping hella hard because hello bilingual romance here we come~

Robin Hood: I DON’T CARE WHAT EVERYONE ELSE SAYS, I HAD FUN WHILE WATCHING “12th CENTURY” DARK KNIGHT AND THAT’S WHAT MATTERED. No, seriously, that was the movie and it was really fun. With the slick, modernized retelling of what is essentially an origin story for the Robin Hood tales, it was in the same vein as the Guy Ritchie version of the King Arthur legends from 2017, which immediately means that I enjoyed it while critics panned it across the board. I mean, hey, I didn’t even know it existed until it did, so there’s something up here considering I saw movies that would have been appropriate to stick the Robin Hood trailer in front of and yet there was nothing. Not everything needs to be a blockbuster event striving for multiple awards, not to mention the fact that it was still an interesting piece visually that I think could get a nomination for makeup or costuming or whatever in a slow year. 2018 was not a slow year, however, which is what I believe is this movie’s main flaw (that and people that aren’t satisfied by fun). I mean, hey, Jamie Foxx got to pay some bills… that counts for something, doesn’t it? Plus, they didn’t take a total shit on the Church! I thought they were going to, as Prince John got turned into a Cardinal and we got to actually see a campaign in the Crusades cause a big impact to further plot, and I have just been conditioned to see my denomination get shat on continuously, especially when it shows up in historical fiction. That was not the case though, as although the Catholic Church was expressly described as being where the power was (because, duh, it was the biggest concentration of funds and membership in Europe, as well as one of the biggest in the world, at the time, and still is in a lot of ways), it’s also clear that the villains are either irreligious or merely culturally Christian and that the villain is not the Church itself, nor religion/the religious, but the manipulation of such earthly trappings. I am fully behind pointing out the hypocrisy that is involved when the earthly trappings are manipulated by mere humans, and it’s great when the distinction between faith and the manipulators of faith are treated as two wholly separate things instead of a symbiotic entity.

Green Book: From part of the team that brought you Dumb and Dumber and There’s Something About Mary, we have an actually heartfelt comedy-drama about some very heavy things (racism, regional xenophobia, interracial disparities, not being [thing] enough to fit in, a dash of homophobia for good measure) that at the same time is neither dark nor makes the situations the characters face seem trivial. The title comes from the name of a travel guide used by African-Americans in America from the 1940s to roughly 1970 (the American Civil Liberties Act of 1967, thankfully, made it essentially a moot point and it died out soon thereafter), a thing that I did not know about myself until an embarrassingly adult age during a wikidive. We don’t often talk about things like Green Books and Sundown Towns with concrete terms during history classes, and I’m hoping that this movie can help gear people towards that and less vague “it was dangerous to go places” sorts of talk, as the concepts were not restricted to the Deep South as the movie suggests. (I am very clearly in a northern, “Yank”, area and the city two towns over used to be a Sundown Town at one point.) Mahershala Ali was brilliantly nuanced as Dr. Don Shirley, the concert pianist who is on a tour to show the people of the Deep South what he, and people who look like him, can do with things like music. Viggo Mortensen, who seemed to be physically channeling the likes of Joe Don Baker and Doug McClure, shows off his superb acting chops and (actual!) conversational Italian skills in a way Baker and McClure could only dream of possessing as Tony Lipp, Shirley’s driver (later turned actor???). It is such a sweet and heartfelt movie between Ali and Mortensen’s characters**** that I really feel like even though it’s likely not a Best Picture contender, it should deserve some sort of recognition somewhere for something because come on now this movie is a treasure. (Edit, 02.25.19: Hahahaha this should have never been put in the Best Picture category, nor should it have won, but it should have been a “hey guys this could be a kind of timely message for some of you” but nope I guess not. ‘Cause you want to know what movies were better? Black Panther, Death of Stalin, The Favourite, Into the Spiderverse, Vice... I could go on...)

White Christmas: Thank you, Turner Classic Movies, for bringing this to the big screen again, because it’s always interesting to see older movies like this in theaters when they’re decades past their expiration date. That being said, my boyfriend and I—neither of whom had ever seen this before—loved poking holes in the things that only worked for the movie because it was a 1956 production, and things that should be passé but are not yet. Not only do you have the only ethnic minorities on-screen as African-American porters and bartenders, but there’s copious amounts of casual smoking, all the lady-leg on dancers when the men are almost completely clothed at all times (the notable exceptions being dude-calves in one number and we got to see a sliver of Bing Crosby’s thigh/tighty-whities while his character is in his dressing room), the career vs marriage debate for women and not the men, and a joke about not being able to find a Democrat in Vermont. The thing that drives the two main characters’ actions (preventing their former general’s family ski lodge from going under) ends up being very weird for two reasons: the first is that there is NO SNOW IN VERMONT IN DECEMBER, which rings much truer now that we are seeing more considerable variances in climate change; secondly, the ski lodge used to be a grits mill and I’ll be fucking damned if that were to be a place that opened today there’d be a bunch of freakin’ Millennials swarming the place like it’s Paradise because of some sort of aesthetic or ironic thing (it’s my generation, I know what I’m referring to), all while inevitably making things worse with their presence (just look at the destruction that over-tourism, especially ecotourism, can cause to fragile environments if allowed to burgeon to large-scale levels).

Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse: If there’s any movie to unWASP your palate after watching White Christmas, it’s this one. Holy wah this was so much fun it almost should be illegal, not to mention very daring with how it treats itself through and through. Just the fact that it pokes fun at the overplayed origin story is funny enough, but it leans into just about everything that can be taken as comedy, all while not making complete fools out of the characters. I adore Miles, as I’ve been waiting for him to be Spider-Man proper in an official movie since I found out about him (not knocking any of the previous three guys to face Spidey in the past two decades; I actually found Homecoming cute), and I really enjoyed how fresh this take was in introducing him. Plus I love that Aunt May is essentially Q. I’m all about Aunt Q. Doc Ock was pretty neat too as an Olivia, because she also did not give off any sort of quirky test tube bunny vibe and was legit menacing. Oh yeah, and my man John Mulaney was Spider-Ham. DO MORE VOICES, JOHN.

Anyhow, just trust me when I say that this movie is really well done as far as everything is concerned. Writing? Check. Directing? Check. Acting? Check. Production design? Check. Art? Check, check, and triple fucking check. If you have to see one animated movie from 2018, then you might need to consider this. As much as I enjoyed everything about Early Man, Isle of Dogs, Incredibles II, and Ralph Breaks the Internet, I have to say that Into the Spiderverse is more important visually as well as the impact on its respective properties.

Mortal Engines: From the moment I saw that it was a Jackson/Boyens/Walsh production, I was down. Then you add this weird mix of steam and diesel punk, crazy city designs, Jihae as Anna Fang, explosions, Hugo Weaving, and a human-made Eldritch Horror? Oh yeah I’m totes down where do I sign up. Lots of fun, fairly pulpy, and I learned that it’s a book series so apparently there could be more though I doubt it because why would they do that.

Aquaman: Sometimes, you have to sit through garbage in order to get to good stuff. Batman squeeing like a fucking Superman fangirl and the Flash being an unlikeable noodle in Justice League last year, plus the general shitshow that was Bats vs Supes, meant that now, finally, I get to have me my Aquaman. Being that I grew up not only knowing the Superfriends cartoon, but the Justice League one as well, I’ve always known that although he can be a total motherfucking badass, Aquaman doesn’t exactly get a good rep in the overall DC fandom. This movie though? Giant fucking middle finger to everyone who ever laughed at Aquaman. One of the local reviewer people wrote in their newspaper article that they didn’t like Aquaman, which of COURSE made me more determined to love it, but eh that’s just me. If you’re not a fan of campy and rambunctious, then this movie isn’t for you, but if you like your Arthur Curry to be the adrenaline-junkie offspring of Jango Fett and Millicent Clyde, with ridiculously silly things happening all around, then this movie is for you. Not all superhero movies need to do what Black Panther did for decolonizing African stories or what Into the Spiderverse did for animation, because sometimes you need something that’s just plain fun and badass… and not mother freaking Superman or Batman. I feel like I said this before… hmm… *stares at Robin Hood* Oh, wait…

The Favourite: This was a weirdly funny movie, with a “wait, that’s it??¿?” ending and what can easily contend for the worst credits design in the history of movies (I know what it was going for, but sweet fuck it was difficult to read anything and I hated it). That being said, it was very good at using the actors to their full potential, I got an interesting look at a British monarch that I rarely see in media (because oops I’m American and usually the things that find their way to me are either about Vicky or a Liz, outliers notwithstanding), and I got to see TTOI’s Glenn Cullen walking a duck through a bordello. Yes, that will make sense during the movie.

Mary, Queen of Scots: Yes, my boyfriend was being very, very, very patient with me over Christmas break (though both this and The Favourite paid off in ways he didn’t expect). This needs a couple awards for makeup at the very least, thanks to the job that they did with Elizabeth I, as they were able to very clearly convey the passage of time with fading smallpox scars, which is wonderful. Definitely not as funny as The Favourite, but also seems to definitely take defense of both Mary and Elizabeth in a way that I’m certain is not the historian-approved standard. It still makes for good cinema, however, which is the important thing to note; sometimes a good movie is not good history, which I think has been a definitive thing I’ve been repeating to myself the past couple of months with the seven docudrama features I’ve seen this year (plus two straight-documentaries).

Pandas: I saw this so late in the year because it was free with museum membership. It was a cute way to burn forty minutes, as well as informational. With the focus being on a specific group of researchers and their efforts, it may feel a bit more like a weird sort of ad if you think about it too much, but is otherwise okay because you just watched almost forty straight minutes of cute pandas and breathtaking Chinese landscapes. It was in 3D too—so very much worth watching.

…and, finally, the last movie of 2018…

Mary Poppins Returns: There are some people out there who are completely enamored by this movie, some who loathe it, and some who are rather an in-between mix. I’m one of the in-between people. It’s really, in my personal opinion, a very difficult thing to replicate the original 1964 Mary Poppins, even if the entire original cast and crew were involved and it was released in 1968 instead of 2018. That being said, this is still towards the top of the heap that would be potential Mary Poppins sequels***** and it does show. The live-action/animation hybridization is not nearly as smooth as Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but it was done in 2D, in a slightly sleeker version of the Mary Poppins style from before. It was very clear, also, that they were trying to cram so much whimsy in at once that it actually was detracting from everything else. The cast was also pretty good, generally speaking, but I can’t take that mustache of Ben Wishaw’s even remotely seriously (Bohemian Rhapsody had much better mustaches by far (is it still a Very Gay Mustache if it is on Ben, but he is playing a character we assume to be heterosexual (or at the absolute very least not-hetero, leaning towards bisexual), or is it instead just a Bad Mustache meant to emulate a previously-established look that then turned out wrong?)) and it is so 1000% obvious that Disney has a crush on Lin-Manuel Miranda that it’s not even funny. The character of Jack just seemed like such a spotlight-stealing, bargain-basement Bert replacement that it was very unsettling, something I am not here for in the very slightest. Did someone in the Disney higher-ups see “Hamilton” and instantly thought he would be good for everything? If I hadn’t seen Moana before this, therefore having been exposed to some of his work before, I would have seriously come out of this movie not wanting to see anything else he was involved in ever again because Jack was that goddamned annoying.

tl;dr: This movie probably shouldn’t’ve been made because the bar was way too damn high, but it got closer than most others would have, so I’m not entirely upset that it does exist and that there are people who enjoy it, despite the issues I have with it.

All in all, an interesting and exciting year! This was definitely a year for movie-goers, that much is certain, and hopefully 2019 either lets us digest or gives us even more! Happy New Year, everyone!

*as of this posting, I’m fully certain that I will have enjoyed watching the documentary Won’t You Be My Neighbor over the Fred Rogers biopic slated for later this year, even though they’re about the same man, for example; another good example of a movie in the vein of Bohemian Rhapsody is the private anxiety, frustration, reluctance, and sense of duty born from the performances in The King’s Speech, which was much more effective filmmaking than a documentary composed of archive footage/photos and interviews

** Tom Hollander is simultaneously all three characters at once in my brain whenever I watch something with him in it and it’s a surreal experience to say the least.

***see: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, which is very testosterone-filled but also very fun and didn’t deserve to tank

****note: one of the major players in making this movie was one of Tony Lip’s kids, and Dr. Shirley’s family has gone on-record as saying that things are greatly exaggerated as far as the closeness of the two of them, so we have the “based on a true story… mostly” issue that other biopics tend to have, though it’s easy to just take the story as that, a story, and it still be rather sweet, which is the point

*****My favorite Mary Poppins sequel is actually Bedknobs and Broomsticks, where Michael Banks has shamed the family name and legacy by not enlisting in WWII (even though he was a (very young) WWI vet and could therefore get away with just being in the Home Guard or part of the civilian workforce) and therefore lives off the street as Emelius Browne, peddling the sleight-of-hand magic he had fancied ever since his childhood nanny was able to wow him and his sister into behaving with what he believed were some of the very same tricks. He lives in abandoned homes of the rich and upper-middle class because it gives him the chance to feel less of a failure, until Eglantine Price and her trio of Blitz orphans walk into his life. After their adventures, he realizes that his childhood nanny was precisely what Eglantine is—a witch who does not prescribe to the dark and dangerous aesthetic he was otherwise always taught as a child—and he accepts this part of life as fact. Emelius and Eglantine have a civil service before he goes off to war at the end of the movie more so that there is legalese in place and certain other paperwork can start to be filed than anything else. By 1947, there has been a proper church service, adoption paperwork on Charlie, Carrie, and Paul have been finalized, and there’s a wee Banks-Price on the way

[chinchillasorchildren]

“Silence”

**Haven’t actually posted a full review in forever...this seemed like the movie to break that streak for...

Martin Scorsese has been grappling with his Catholic faith for his entire career, even when it seemed the least obvious. The intensity of his religious convictions, as well as the intensity of his questions and severe doubts, have manifested in ways both literal (The Last Temptation of the Christ) and abstract (Taxi Driver). Catholicism (or, in a sense, any faith) is the third pillar at the foundation of his filmmaking, seated right alongside masculinity and violence (and all of the intersections among the lot).

Though Scorsese remains an impeccable craftsman, often invigorating his material with dynamism of someone decades younger, he has recently started to run on fumes when dealing with story’s beyond their basic text. The Wolf of Wall Street tackles excess, but to the point of becoming excessive itself. Even Best Picture winner The Departed, though powerfully acted and edited, comes up short when one looks for something to chew on beyond the bloody bodycount.

The apparent exhaustion of two of Scorsese’s thematic pillars (well, for now) has left a clearing for capital F Faith to grab the spotlight all for itself. After an on-and-off journey of roughly 30 years, Scorsese has taken Shusaku Endo’s novel “Silence” and brought it to life on the big screen. Here, the man who almost became a priest turns his camera to meet not just his maker, but the ideals and practices of those serving in his name. And, while not without its faults (largely at the outset), Silence ultimately proves itself to be a worthy landmark moment of the latter stages of Scorsese’s career. Regardless of your religious persuasion (or lack thereof), there is a tremendous amount of value in the issues raised in this exhaustive and exhausting work of Catholic cinema. Though not the director’s most polished or lush work, it more than compensates with its staggering devotion to crafting a drama filled with ideas about the earthly and the transcendent.

Yet much like the film’s journey to the big screen, Silence is not without its hiccups. The earliest passages, concerning Jesuit priests Rodrigues (Andrew Garfield) and Garrpe (Adam Driver) seeking out a former mentor in 17th century Japan, come off as stilted. Despite some striking, simple visuals, Silence begins by playing things in a strangely safe manner. At times, it even seems shockingly amateurish. Even longtime Scorsese editor (and basically co-director) Thelma Schoonmaker isn’t immune, and turns in some of her weakest work to date. Simple conversations change angles with a frequency at odds with such contemplative subject matter. And Mr. Driver, though an intriguing casting choice, can’t quite master what is supposed to be a Portuguese accent (the Portuguese characters speak in English). Early on, a few lines escape his throat like a squawk from a goose raised in the Bronx. Garfield generally fares better, though even he is not without his stilted moments. It’s not an auspicious beginning, especially for a film that is so clearly a labor of passion.

But the further the two Jesuits step into the so-called “swamp of Japan,” the more Silence finds its footing. The beauty of Endo’s novel, which Scorsese has wisely left intact, is its refusal to sugarcoat or simplify the conflicts at hand. And what conflicts they are. On the surface, Silence‘s tale involves priests administering aid to Japanese Christians living under persecution. In less enlightened times, such a socio-political conflict would have likely been sanded down to lift the Jesuits up as Christ-like figures. Scorsese includes such a moment, though it’s hardly presented as sincere. Alone and starving, Fr. Rodrigues finds himself confronted with his reflection. After a moment, the face transforms into a familiar sight: a Goya painting of Christ’s face which we’ve been shown as how Rodrigues imagines the Lamb of God in his prayers and meditations. Garfield, with his thin features and his hair grown out into a magnificent mane, makes a fitting vessel for this sort of transfiguration.

The moment, alas, does not come greeted with a moment of intervention or inspiration. Rodrigues bursts into unsettling, hollow laughter. In his manic, dehydrated state, he seems ecstatic with such a vision, but the tone and timing suggests the sort of madness one would find in a 70s-era Herzog drama. Yet Scorsese curtails the sequence before such madness turns hallucinatory. Rodrigo Prieto’s images, even at their most painterly, have an air of reality to them. The staging thrives on ordinariness, rather than elaborately constructed tableaus.

All the better, then, to enable the film to cut to the heart of its conflicts. Somewhere towards the middle (I think) of the film, Silence shifts from acting as a drama about the faithful, and morphs into a searing interrogation of men of the cloth and their motivations. Rodrigues meets a number of foils among the Japanese, chief among them a translator (Tadanobu Asano) and the inquisitor Inoue (Issei Ogata). Though radically different in their approaches, the two men proceed to challenge not just Rodrigues’ convictions and his mission, but the core of Catholicism itself, as well as its place in a country like Japan.

And it’s here, when it’s most bound to simple scenes of people talking, that Silence finally grasps the intangible profundity it’s been reaching for the whole time. Asano and Ogata make excellent philosophical adversaries for Garfield’s Rodrigues, with Ogata in particular relishing every word (among his most notable jabs: “the price for your glory is their suffering.”) So many faith-based films use Christian conviction as a crutch, including this year’s Hacksaw Ridge, which also planted Mr. Garfield at the center. With that baseline established, a film like Silence becomes all the more remarkable. Here is a drama with source material from a Catholic writer (albeit a Japanese convert, and not a European), directed by a passionately Catholic director, that avoids turning its protagonists into the one-note martyrs they secretly wish to be.

The most magnificent wrench of all, however, comes in the form of Fr. Ferreira (Liam Neeson, thankfully not even attempting the accent). In addition to administering to the persecuted faithful, Rodrigues and Garrpe have snuck into Japan to seek out their former mentor, who has been rumored to have renounced the faith and taken up life as an ordinary member of Japanese society. Ferreira’s eventual return to the narrative (best left unsaid) gives Silence a final headbutt of ambiguity, heightening the specificity of the film’s conflicts, while simultaneously making them all the more universal. Neeson, in his all-too-brief screen time, is nothing short of mesmerizing. In such quick moments, he conveys Ferreira’s decades of work in Japan, and the toll it took on him. Ferreira’s exploits could have easily been their own film, and the way Neeson takes the bones of Scorsese and Jay Cocks’ script and turns it into its own meal is nothing short of astonishing. It’s a masterful moment of teaching both for Rodrigues and the viewer, the complexity of which has stayed with me long after the lights went up in the theater.

In my four years at a Jesuit-led high school, one of the theological ideas that I remember most is that faith without room for doubt is not really faith, but merely blind obedience. Such obedience was for angels, but not for mankind, gifted (or cursed) with the spark of true free will. That remarkably nuanced notion, standing in such stark contrast to the right wing extremists now posturing as 21st century moralists, has stayed with me even as whatever religion I had slipped away. And, whatever my personal beliefs now, that Catholic and Jesuit identity (hello, Catholic guilt, you old bastard) is still etched, however faintly, in my being. To see that same sort of depth is a monumental intellectual achievement, one that overrides the vagueries that somewhat plague the central role of Rodrigues (he is both an individual and a representative of the faith as a whole, though not quite to the degree where it feels possible to empathize with him enough). With such a long wait, it would be tempting to holdSilence to the standard that anything less than a masterpiece would be a letdown. To do so, I think, would be to dismiss the tremendous accomplishments on display. Rodrigues and Garrpe may find themselves starving, but their story is veritable feast of ideas, the strengths of which are made all the more powerful by their existence alongside the flaws.

Grade: B+

[screenandcinema]

Coming Attractions November 2018

As usual, we present monthly previews of new movies being released. These are the movies what will be hitting your local cinemas this month:

November 2nd

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms - Mackenzie Foy, Keira Knightley, Helen Mirren, and Morgan Freeman star this retelling of The Nutcracker Ballet from our friends at Walt Disney. The holidays are starting early this year for those looking for a wintry treat,

Bohemian Rhapsody - Bryan Singer directs* this biopic of Queen lead singer Freddie Mercury. This project has been in production for some time with Sasha Baron Cohen slated to portray Mercury for years until Rami Malek (Mr. Robot) was tapped for the leading role. Reviews so far for Bohemian Rhapsody have been mixed, but fans of music biopics will show up regardless. (*Singer didn’t return to the set last year after Thanksgiving and was subsequently fired with two weeks left of filming. Director Dexter Fletcher ultimately finished the film, but Singer still gets the lone credit)

November 9th 

The Grinch - Almost 18 years to the day after the release of the live-action adaptation starring Jim Carrey and directed by Ron Howard, the grumpy green Grinch created by Dr. Suess is back on the big screen. This time, however, The Grinch is fully animated by Illumination Entertainment (the people behind Minions) and features the voice of Benedict Cumberbatch. I am sure kids will be lined up to watch this 86 minute feature!

The Girl in Spider’s Web: A New Dragon Tattoo Story - Is it a sequel? It is a reboot? Who knows?! But Lisbeth Salander, the girl with the dragon tattoo, is finally back on the big screen with Claire Foy taking over the leading role. Foy becomes the third actress to play Salander, after Rooney Mara in 2011′s adaptation from David Fincher and Noomi Rapace who starred in the Swedish trilogy in 2009.

Overlord - J.J. Abrams produces this upcoming war horror film which follows a team of American soldiers during WWII who uncover secret Nazi experiments. Overlord looks fantastic and got great reviews when it premiered at Fantastic Fest in September. Not to mention I am a sucker for all things Bad Robot. Count me in.

November 16th

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - Two years ago, I was moderately disappointed by Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them the first post-Harry Potter film set in J.K. Rowling’s Wizarding World. I will see make my best effort to see The Crimes of Grindelwald in the hopes that it puts the franchise back on track, but I am nowhere near excited for this film as I was for its predecessor in the run-up to its release.

Widows - Steve McQueen directs this heist film written by author-turned-screenwriter Gillian Flynn. The ensemble cast of Widows includes the titular foursome of Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki and Cynthia Erivo in addition to a handful of household names (and should be household names) like Colin Farrell, Brian Tyree Henry, Daniel Kaluuya, Jacki Weaver, Carrie Coon, Robert Duvall, and Liam Neeson. Widows got rave reviews when it premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September and is one film to keep an eye on come awards season.

Instant Family - Mark Wahlberg and Rose Byrne take in a trio of foster children in this comedy from the director of Daddy’s Home (and Daddy’s Home 2). I can’t say what hijinks ensure when Wahlberg and Byrne welcome these kids to their home, but I can almost guarantee these kids will find themselves adopted by the film’s end.

November 21st

Creed II - The movie this month I am looking forward to the most is none other than the sequel to the 2015 breakout hit Creed. This new Creed film looks to wear many hats, not only it is a sequel to Creed and the eighth film in the complete Rocky series, it also acts as a follow-up to 1985′s Rocky IV with the return of Ivan Drago, again played by Dolph Lundgren. While stars Michael B. Jordan, Tessa Thompson, and Sylvester Stallone all return for Creed II, writer/director of the first film, Ryan Coogler does not, due to his commitment to this year’s blockbuster Black Panther. If you haven’t had the pleasure of seeing Creed, do yourself a favor and watch it over the next few weeks. I for one know I will be revisiting it very soon in anticipation of Creed II.

Ralph Breaks the Internet - I only discovered the 2012 Disney animated film Wreck-It Ralph a few years ago and I greatly enjoyed it. And now in the sequel, Ralph, voiced by John C. Reilly, is leaving the arcade and taking his talents to the internet. Disney appears to be pulling out all the stops in terms of their properties as early trailers show Star Wars, Marvel and Disney characters galore making appearances. The movie almost seems to feel like Disney’s version of Ready Player One. Recently, when it comes to Disney animated films, Pixar seems to be getting all the attention, but Walt Disney Animation Studios has quietly put together a solid streak of great films, looking at their last five films before Ralph Breaks the Internet, you have Wreck-It Ralph, Frozen, Big Hero 6, Zootopia and Moana. And with Frozen 2 slated for next November, a streak that will continue easily.

Robin Hood - Oh look. Another Robin Hood movie just in time for Thanksgiving. Unfortunately, a great cast including Tagon Egerton as Robin Hood, Jamie Foxx as Little John and Ben Mendelsohn as the Sheriff of Nottingham won’t be able to save this terrible-looking adaptation.

Green Book - The Farrelly Brothers have directed 11 films together since 1996, but now Peter Farrelly, the elder brother, is on his own with his first solo directing credit since 1994 with Green Book starring Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali. Green Book is the true story of the relationship between a Jamaican-American musician and a New York bouncer on their tour of the Deep South in the 1960s. Green Book looks both funny and heartwarming and could be one to keep in mind this month.

The Front Runner (Wide) - While Jason Reitman’s new feature, the story of Gary Hart’s 1988 presidential campaign, won’t open wide until the end of the month, it will be opening in limited release on Election Day, November 6th. This is your reminder to vote. VOTE. Also, Hugh Jackman plays Gary Hart and The Front Runner looks great. 

November 30th

If Beale Street Could Talk - Barry Jenkins is back with his first feature film since 2016′s Best Picture winner Moonlight. The film which is based on a 1970s novel of the same name follows a woman trying to free his wrongly convicted husband. If Beale Street Could Talk has been wowing critics at film festivals this fall already and will likely do the same for audiences when it comes out later this month.

Now for a quick look ahead to December, my top picks for next month are Mortal Engines, Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse, and Aquaman.

-MB-

[ralphmorgan-blog1]

‘Love Actually’ Is Leaving Netflix Soon, So Christmas Is Going To Suck This Year

Well, boys and girls, it looks like Christmas is really going to blow this year. In Netflix's ongoing and persistent mission to literally ruin my life, the 2003 Richard Curtis directed holiday classicfilm  leaves Netflix in October. I know. I KNOW. Why don't you just murder me instead, Netflix? Because that's basically what you're doing to me with this soulless stunt.

This terrible, heartbreaking news was announced when the streaming service released its monthly list of what's coming and leaving Netflix in October 2017. I can tell you right now, Netflix subscribers are  going to like this list at all. First of all, this tragedy. The movie officially leaves Netflix on Oct. 1, 2017. Seriously, who does that? You guys couldn't have waited until after the Christmas season to pull the plug? Don't you think that's what Jesus would have done? Now you're forcing me to find some terrible illegal stream that will likely buffer over all the best parts — like when Alan Rickman is trying to buy that necklace from Mr. Bean, or when Laura Linney is finally hooking up with Hot Carl, or when that 12-year-old girl sings “All I Want For Christmas” better than Mariah Carey did. And of course it  buffer over the worst parts, like when that guy tells his best friend's wife that he loves her, subtly but affectively ruining their relationship forever, or when that same man creepily spied on Kiera Knightley on her wedding day, or basically anything from that particular storyline.

Universal Pictures

And if you think that's bad, just listen to these other beautiful films and TV shows that are leaving Netflix in October, too. Get ready to say goodbye to the following departing content on Oct. 1: Seasons 1 – 7, Seasons 1 – 5,  Seasons 1 – 7,  Seasons 1 – 4,  Seasons 1 – 9,  Seasons 1 – 4,  Seasons 1 – 5,  andAnd that's not even all of it — those are just the ones I chose to share because I care about them the most. I never even got the chance to watch , even though I totally have clear eyes and a full heart. Why am I losing?!

But wait, in case you weren't depressed enough already — there's even more. The following movies and shows are also leaving Netflix in October, just for some reason not right on Oct. 1. They are:  Seasons 1 – 4 (leaving Oct. 19),  Seasons 5 – 11 (leaving Oct. 21),  Seasons 2 – 3 (leaving Oct. 27), Seasons 1 – 5 (leaving Oct. 27), and Seasons 9 – 14 (leaving Oct. 29). Basically, October is a slaughterfest for Netflix lovers.

If you want something marginally positive to take your mind off of all this bad news, let me remind that while may no longer be on Netflix, there is still at least this adorable  reunion that the cast made this year. Actors Hugh Grant, Keira Knightley, Colin Firth, Liam Neeson, Bill Nighy, Andrew Lincoln, and Rowan Atkinson all reunited last March, 14 years after the film first hit theaters. The now-older cast joined with the film's writer-director Richard Curtis for NBC's Red Nose Day, and made a 15-minute reunion special to show what all your favorite  characters are up to now.

For some reason (I guess because everyone is determined to ruin Christmas), the full 15-minute special was taken off of YouTube. But, luckily, you can still watch it on Vimeo. Treat yourself to watching a 57-year-old Hugh Grant dance his way down the stairs to Drake's “Hotline Bling,” to Bill Nighy pretending he knows who the Kardashians are, to Rowan Atkinson recreating the gift wrap scene, and to Thomas Brodie-Sangster looking both way older and somehow exactly the same. It's a Christmas miracle.

More From this publisher : HERE

=> *********************************************** Post Source Here: ‘Love Actually’ Is Leaving Netflix Soon, So Christmas Is Going To Suck This Year ************************************ =>

‘Love Actually’ Is Leaving Netflix Soon, So Christmas Is Going To Suck This Year was originally posted by A 18 MOA Top News from around