#you might think I know about tropes because of a cinema special interest but I can assure you this is once again the hunger games’ fault

[moriartyyouwhore]

wait I just realised they LITERALLY did the save the dog trope with Cooper Howard

[evco-productions]

“The Lone Ranger” (2013) and the Origins of This Blog

It was July, 2013. I was about to go into the eighth grade. Let’s take a moment and let the ‘Nam flashbacks pass.

Now that we’ve done that, at this particular point in time, I was slowly but surely starting to cultivate my interest in movies. I was going to the theater more frequently with friends and family; even though it was only to see mainstream stuff like the next Mission: Impossible or Despicable Me or Marvel chapter, I was still going.

One movie I was particularly excited for that summer was the remake of The Lone Ranger. Yes, that remake. The one starring Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer (this movie was doomed to fail from the fucking start, wasn’t it?) that you forgot even happened.

I was excited for this movie because I liked Westerns. I’ve always had a special place in my heart for Westerns. In fact, if you track back to my early childhood, that was probably where my love for cinema actually started. Every time I went over to my grandparents’ house, my granddad would have a John Wayne or a Clint Eastwood movie on and he would watch them with such interest that I couldn’t help but do the same. To this day, whenever I find a good Western, I experience such strong feelings of delight and excitement. If you ask me, there’s still no more thrilling a trope for an action movie to do than a quickdraw shootout. That long moment of intense silence where both you and the characters know someone is going to die, and then finally the lightning-fast movements of both characters followed by gunfire…it captures my full attention every time.

We also had the first season of the old 1950s Lone Ranger show on DVD, so unlike a lot of people whom Disney no doubt wished would have seen this movie, I actually knew a little about who the Lone Ranger was as a character.

So, I went to the theater and I saw this movie. And then I saw it a second time. And then a third time. Three times in all. I think that was the first time I’d ever seen a single movie in the theater that many times.

I kid you not: when the credits rolled, there was a standing ovation every. Single. Time. That is completely true. There’s pretty much no way for me to prove it…but it’s true.

And I think that was it: I think that was the moment the seed for this blog was planted. Because I looked up at the screen and behold, I saw a movie reviled by critics both professional and not-professional. But those critics were faceless. Not to say they aren’t people existing in the same dimension as you and me, but nevertheless they weren’t there. But I was there in a theater full of people who enjoyed themselves so much they had to clap to let it all out even though no one who had anything to do with the making of the movie was in the room to hear it. And I didn’t have the words as a thirteen-year-old kid, but if I had, I would have asked myself, “How is this not valid?”

Obviously, this doesn’t just apply to The Lone Ranger. I won’t die on that hill. You don’t have to like that movie. But how many dozens of other movies are out there whose tale of woe is exactly the same? And the chances that you would agree with the critics out there and despise all of them? Pretty much nonexistent. Everyone has missed out on a good movie at some point in their life because they took someone else’s review for granted. Why do we do that? Why do we let other people tell us what to like? Even worse…what to try to like? There’s nothing wrong with sharing and comparing opinions. If I thought there was, I wouldn’t be writing this. But to take those opinions at their word just…because? That doesn’t sit right with me. Maybe because if we’re willing to take total strangers at their word when it comes to our entertainment…what else might we be willing to take their word on?

You can’t ever put knowledge in a bottle and twist the cap closed. Knowledge is infinite. You’ll never know everything there is to know. I’ll never see every movie there is to see. That’s why it doesn’t matter how little or greatly you choose to diversify your watchlist. Whether you only watch American-made movies or you throw a little French new wave in there doesn’t make a difference. You’ll never be an expert, it’s not about that. It’s about why you’re watching what you’ve chosen to watch.

Are you watching it because you’re interested in it or because someone told you that you should be? Are you not watching it because you’re disinterested in it, or because someone told you that you shouldn’t be?

If you’ve never asked yourself those questions, I encourage you to begin now. Don’t miss out on good movies just because someone else doesn’t think they’re good.

[carol-effing-danvers]

Steve Rogers is a Monster

Yeah, that’s a hell of a title, isn’t it? Strap in, it only gets worse from here. 

(click here if you’d prefer to read this on AO3)

Forewarning, if you enjoyed the epilogue for Endgame, this particular essay is not for you - and no, I am not bashing the Steve/Peggy shippers, you are beautiful human beings who make the fandom brighter and I’m happy that at least someone in this fandom got the ending they wanted.

Additional warning: if you expect this to be another Civil War debate, you will also be disappointed. There has never been a measurement invented that can adequately describe how much I loathe the verbal dick measuring contest that seems to pass for human interaction between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers in this franchise. It’s not funny or entertaining - it’s exhausting, uncomfortable, and frankly it’s rather lazy writing.

This is about the very specific way that the epilogue in Endgame completely changed the way the character of Steve Rogers can be interpreted, and I don’t just mean the very illogical and contradictory way that time travel is explained, both in the movie itself and the fact that the writers and directors have two completely different views on how that worked out. 

I mean that the choice made by Steve Rogers in the very last minutes of that movie alters the way I view each and every one of his actions starting from The First Avenger and that alteration is exactly what I want to talk about, because whether you view it as deserving or not, what Steve does at the conclusion of Endgame was the most selfish thing humanly possible. Time is a thief, but somehow Steve managed to steal even more than Time.

Side note here: I understand that I am a completely biased Stucky shipper, a friend to Barnes and Noble, a Starbucks aficionado - sorry. Anyway, I’ve always believed that Steve and Bucky were destined blah blah blah, but I was never expecting a Stucky ending. Disney wasn’t going to do that, and I knew that, I wasn’t bothered that Steve and Bucky weren’t doing the smoochies by the end. But Bucky’s facial expression during those last minutes was gut-wrenching. Like...I have no idea what kind of cues the script and directors gave him, but in the future, please don’t ask Sebastian Stan to look sad unless you want soul-crushing devastation. It’s not Seb’s fault, his features are just arranged that way - but the fact that the editing staff allowed Sam to be sad though elated to be entrusted with the Shield and Bucky looked like his soul was being physically torn out of his body was an… interesting choice. 

Other side note: if you’re writing about time travel, I’m begging y’all to get your facts straight. Or just don’t write about time travel. It almost always sounds better on paper than it does on screen and it means that you’ve opened doors to more questions than you’ve probably got the answers for. I know this was about trying to set up the idea of the multiverse, I get that, but there were better and less messy ways to do that, and I know that because I’ve done it before. @Marvel: Let me write you a six-way orgy you fucking cowards~

By going back in time, Steve robbed Peggy of the future that would have been hers - not only that, he’s robbed her of even the chance of making the choice between those futures, because you honestly could not tell me with a straight face that Steve told her the complete truth of what he had done and she would be okay with him alternating the very course of the future. It doesn’t help his case that he has a history of not disclosing truths that he knows will be painful or inconvenient for other people in his life.

He robbed his loved ones - Sam, Bucky, Wanda - of the years they would have spent with him. Sure, he ‘came back’ after Peggy passed away, but they are adults in the prime of youth who knew him sixty years ago in his own time and he is an old, old man who has lived an entire life completely separated from them. He is practically a stranger with a name they know, but a history that no longer belongs to any of them - not even his oldest friend. They have him back, but judging from his age, they’ll be lucky to get even ten more years with him. Assuming of course, that any of them can stand to speak to him - I certainly couldn’t blame them if they tell him to go to hell and take his dad jokes with him. 

Steve has stolen away their friend and dropped off an elderly and dying near-stranger in his place, and this is treated by the writing (and the majority of the acting) as a wild and unexpected but not tragic event. 

Is it really that unexpected, though?

I recall seeing a Game of Thrones essay on Daenerys across my dash (I’m sorry, love, I don’t recall who you are since it’s not a fandom I’m in, but if someone knows who wrote that, please post the link!) which detailed how her ending in the series was foreshadowed many times by her penchant for bloody killings and her habit of surrounding herself with her own fawning friends.

Months after reading that, I had the thought: though Steve is never really shown thinking about Peggy after Civil War, except in a few scattered scenes in Endgame, was this foreshadowed? Whether you believe that his actions are justified or not, what Steve does is still, in the end, selfish at its very heart, and Steve Rogers is not a selfish person. 

Oh no, my dear friends and readers. Because taking this action has solidified and clarified Steve Rogers as the biggest and most selfish asshole in this whole universe.

Steve does not do the right thing, Steve does the thing that will most make him feel better. The fact that this often happens to be the right thing in the end is more the result of happy coincidence than any special sort of moral authority that the man holds. 

Rescuing Bucky Barnes and his fellow captives in a prisoner of war camp from being experimented on by an insane Nazi eugenicist? That was not a moral stand, that was endangering himself, Peggy Carter, and Howard Stark because he couldn’t handle the reality of his best friend being killed in war.

Sacrificing himself by putting the Valkyrie down in the Arctic Circle? That was not about sparing human lives, that was about Steve seeing his friend die right in front of him and not being able to deal with the grief. There were ways he could’ve prevented the plane from killing people without killing himself.

Trying to make Bucky remember who he was? And later on, saving him from the government agencies who wanted to hunt him down? Although, arguably, that last one is also just good common sense - Steve was already shown that government agencies could and were corrupted by HYDRA and he’d also seen how dangerous the Winter Soldier could be when unleashed. 

Steve did, I think, truly believe that this was the right thing to do, but it was also about keeping his connection - his very last, since Peggy had descended into dementia caused by Alzheimer’s before she ultimately died - to a past that for him, was only months or years ago, rather than decades. In some ways, this is completely understandable - Bucky might be the very last person left alive who truly knows who the real Steve Rogers is, because the rest of these people only know Captain America and we are consistently shown through multiple movies how uncomfortable this makes him.

This gets...considerably less and less understandable as we are shown Steve’s growing relationships with Natasha, Sam, Wanda - even Sharon, though she barely gets any screen time and they share the most awkward kiss I’ve ever seen - and indeed, what might be the most uncomfortable kiss in cinema history.

Side Note 3: This is made even more awkward by the director’s choice to have two of Steve’s friends watching them the whole time - seriously, who even does that? Why would you make them do that? Only sociopaths make out with their friends staring at them like that. It’s so fucking creepy - and don’t even get me fucking started on the fact that she’s also apparently his own niece. AHHHHH!

But we are shown, over and over again, that Steve is capable of building close meaningful relationships with people in the present. They don’t know his whole history, but they do know Steve Rogers rather than Captain America and they care about him deeply. 

Side Note 4: Notice that I don’t count Tony Stark among those people - despite this strangely persistent narrative that the various writers and directors tried to sell to the audience, Tony and Steve were not friends. They were never friends. They were colleagues at best, but these were two men who neither liked nor understood each other very well, but had to work together. And sometimes that’s okay, too. (Oh dear, I just gave the Stony fans a fit too, didn’t I? Sorry, guys. Enemies to Lovers is a great trope, I support you!)

But let’s set aside Steve’s gross betrayal of the people who loved him. We’ll also ignore the question of whether the motive for these good actions has tainted the actions themselves. Because even without questioning these, the conclusion of this story arc still transforms Steve into the biggest monster this franchise has. 

The very fundamental way that the writers and directors can’t agree on how the time travel mechanics in their own story work mean that Steve has just done one of two things and they range from shady and very questionable to absolutely fucking horrific. 

The first, that he’s created his own alternate universe to exist in, is morally dubious at best. Even the people who support this theory and liked the ending seem to feel that it wasn’t necessarily a ten out of ten on the moral goodness spectrum. They’ll say things like ‘he deserved to have his happy ending’. Even that phrasing seems to acknowledge that doing this was the opposite of the right thing. It just considers doing the wrong thing as being justified rather than horrifying. 

But let’s examine this first idea for a minute - even this, the more innocent of the two implications, means that rather than really processing his grief or dealing with the repeated tragedies and losses that have occured in his life, even as he was running group therapy sessions and grief counseling, Steve Rogers chose to escape his current life by creating an alternate universe that specifically allows he himself to live out his own fucking fantasies of the way his life should have turned out. 

That, in case you are not aware, is wildly fucked up. I thought I was playing pretty fast and loose with Steve’s characterization when I turned him into an extremely polite serial killer but as it turns out, I clearly just wasn’t setting the bar high enough, because that’s somehow even more fucked up than being an undercover child soldier with a small sadistic streak. 

Hm, and now I feel I should have been more creative there...

The second, and even more horrifying option, is that this older Steve Rogers has been in this world the whole time, watching as things unfolded just as we’ve seen over the past decade, taking ‘the slow way’ through time. 

Side Note 5: I do kind of understand why you would do it this way, because that’s really cool and shocking when you say that! Until you think about it for longer than three seconds and suddenly you realize…

Everything that has happened here, every tragedy and downfall these people experienced, happened because Steve Rogers lived his happily ever after with his beautiful wife and did absolutely nothing to stop it. He got to fuck Peggy Carter and watched as his wife built an empire of intelligence networks, knowing that her efforts were completely in vain because her agency was rotten to the core and he never told her.

Every horrifying act committed by HYDRA under the guise of SHIELD was permitted through Steve Rogers’ negligence. And that’s just the wider big-picture worldview, large and shocking, but not personal. 

What about the people that Steve claims to actually care about? 

This means that Steve lived his whole life in contentment with his wife and children while his best friend was physically and psychologically tortured for over seventy years and just...let that go. 

He allowed one friend to murder another in the nineties, when the Winter Soldier was sent after Howard and Maria Stark. Then their child was being advised by a greedy self-interested warmonger who paid terrorists to drag him off to be tortured and slaughtered, and Steve did nothing about that, either. 

Bruce Banner was exploited, experimented on, and made into a monster against his will in the failed pursuit of recreating what was done to Steve, resulting in billions of dollars in damage and dozens or even hundreds of lives lost, and Steve allowed that to happen, too. 

Like Bucky Barnes, Natasha Romanov was physically and psychologically tortured for others to use her as a living weapon - except that this was probably happening to her since early childhood, and a man her future self loved and trusted implicitly did nothing to save her from this upbringing. 

The Maximoff twins are shown to have not wealthy but loving parents who are murdered in front of them and they both endure days of laying in the rubble of their ruined apartment, wondering if the bomb in their living room would go off and kill them. Later, they are taken in by HYDRA, experimented on, and recruited as child soldiers to the cause when they show signs of having supernatural powers. They start a series of events that result in the destruction of a major city and the loss of what is probably thousands of lives. Pietro is murdered while trying to help the Avengers to stop this, and Wanda suffers the loss of the very last living person she loved. None of these things seem to have bothered Future Steve. 

Steve “I can’t sit on the sidelines when I see a situation go sideways” Rogers, planted himself on that fucking sideline and observed for nearly eighty years as friends, colleagues, and his own wife were lied to, brainwashed, tortured, vilified, and hunted down like animals.

And then there Steve Rogers himself - not the Endgame Steve Rogers, the Steve Rogers who brought down a Nazi plane and will lie beneath the ice for seventy years while everything he knows disappear (mostly) innocent of these horrors, the life he would’ve lived stolen from him by a stranger with his name and his face from another universe.

What I’m saying here is that if you consider this idea for any amount of time, it took Steve Rogers less than ten minutes to become the most evil and disturbing figure in the entire MCU, only (not really tho) contested by Thanos himself. 

Gross and poorly reasoned libertarian ethics aside, Thanos genuinely believes that he did what he did for the sake of the entire population. It’s made fairly explicitly clear that Steve didn’t do this for anyone but himself. 

Call me crazy, but if everyone you know needs to suffer and multiple planet-wide devestations have to happen in order for you to get your happy ending, you might be the bad guy. 

Maybe I’m just old-fashioned?

[sunshine304]

Movies watched in 2021: Love and Monsters

Look. I love Dylan O’Brien, so I was really looking forward to this movie. Of course, it also suffered from the closed cinemas last year but is now showing on Netflix (Germany, I guess some other countries had an earlier release).

The world went to hell. Because humanity nuked an asteroid that would’ve have destroyed Earth, the nuclear waste caused a mutation in cold-blooded animals. The result was huge mutated monster insects, amphibians, spiders etc. and many, many dead people. Joel (Dylan O’Brien) survived one of the worst outbreaks and has been living in an underground colony with several other survivors for seven years now. His parents died and his girlfriend Aimee (Jessica Henwick) got separated from him in the chaos.

Joel is a bit of a sadsack, because he still pines for Aimee and their lost love after all these years and also is a bad fighter that doesn’t contribute much to his colony except for cooking and taking care of radiocommunication. In this manner he finds Aimee again - she’s in a colony 140 km west from him. And in a crazy bout of spontaneousness Joel decides to go to her.

Ill equipped as he is he still braves the outside world for the first time in seven years, just to finally reunite with the woman he loves. On his journey he meets a dog, two other survivors (Michael Rooker and Ariana Greenblatt), and lots and lots of monsters.

I really enjoyed this movie. I felt it had a kind of 80s fantasy-adventure movie vibe. You now, those entertaining, mostly light-hearted movies that you could easily watch as an older kid because nothing really bad happens in them but they’re still thrilling and fun enough to keep you interested.  “Love & Monsters” is a movie like that. Perhaps not as good as the best of that lot, but still fairly good.

The acting was good and I think they all did really well in their roles. I especially enjoyed Ariana Greenblatt as Minnow. I don’t know if I was happy with the voice over, it was an okay way to establish the world, but it felt a bit jarring at times. This might have been the dubbing, though, even though it was Dylan O’Brien’s usual movie voice actor. Of course, it’s not a super deep movie, but there were some emotional scenes which Dylan O’Brien sold well.

The special effects were really, really good, especially for such a moderately budgeted movie. The monsters were fun and often blended into the surrounding landscapes, which was really cool. The world building was fun and would work well for sequels.

If I wanted to complain about something, I thought that there were too many Deus ex Machina moments. Then again, it was kind of refreshing to for once have a male protagonist who is just a normal guy that isn’t inherently great at fighting and survival (the posters definitely make him seem more heroic than he is at the beginning). I’ve seen comparisons to “Zombieland” a lot and there are similarities of course. These movies use certain tropes and character stereotypes to the same effect, but I at least found Joel more likeable then Columbus.

I’ve seen comments on this movie that whined about how there “aren’t any stakes“ and “it’s not serious and not dark enough even though it’s the end of the world“. Like, people really, can’t you just be happy with a little entertaining movie that for once isn’t a dark!grim!gritty dystopia where everyone tries to kill each other? Like, many scenes played outside in daylight! I could actually see what’s going on! Also, I didn’t have to watch several disposable characters get killed off so that the lead could cry about it. That was so refreshing!

Also, please please learn to read metaphors and to interpret easy clues. Just, please. There’s one super easy metaphor in this movie that’s just self-explanatory but... people don’t get it. Also, the resolution of it all... how clear is the movie supposed to be? Do you really need to have everything spelled out in huge obvious dialogue?

My God.

Anyway, fun movie, would watch a sequel. Want to see those ice spiders.

8/10

Also also, Boy the dog? The best!

[a-small-batch-of-dragons]

Peggysous Week Day One: Edelweiss

Read on Ao3 (tumblr’s a fuck pls click the link)

Thanks to @fandomsandxfiles-writes for hosting!

Edelweiss: Signifies deep love and devotion. Native to the Alps, so those who harvest this flower must face danger to prove that love and devotion.

***

The war is over. They’re home now. And yet, Peggy still has not stepped foot in a cinema? Daniel’s not having it. Plus, they both could do with a…little reminder, of sorts.

“I’m not one for the cinema.”

“I know, Peg,” Daniel says, handing her the bowl, “believe me.”

Peggy stifles a laugh at Daniel’s patient exasperation. “I believe Mr. Jarvis had a…similar reaction.”

“Did he?”

“We were at the racetrack, looking for Calvin Chadwick.” Daniel hums. “I didn’t know who Whitney Frost was.”

“Wait, seriously?” Daniel turns off the sink and drapes the towel over the fridge handle. “Peg, her face was on posters everywhere in New York.”

Peggy shrugs. “Like I said, I’m not one for the cinema.”

Daniel just shakes his head with a smile. “And what did Jarvis have to say to that.”

“He asked me if I assemble rifles in my free time.”

Daniel throws his head back, laughing. Peggy glares at him in mock offense, only to have it ruined when she can’t help but smile when he looks at her. He slumps against the counter for support, still laughing.

“If only he knew,” Daniel murmurs through the last of his chuckles.

“If only he knew what?”

“That you spend your free time reading Agatha Christie and muttering about how stupid the characters are under your breath.”

“It’s not like it’s hard,” Peggy mutters.

“Like that.”

Peggy whacks his arm halfheartedly with her own dish towel. “I’ll have you know I’m getting better at it.”

“What, predicting the ending or not getting frustrated with fictional characters?”

“…yes.”

Daniel bumps her shoulder lightly. “Well, call me crazy, but I think that might have something to do with what you do for a living.” He turns around, leaning against the counter. “Long days solving mysteries, chasing bad guys, all you’re missing is a trench coat and a fedora.”

“I’ll have you know I have perfectly suitable hats,” Peggy says, making them both laugh.

“Seriously, Peg,” Daniel says after they both stop laughing, “if you don’t wanna go, you don’t have to. I just…well, I kinda wanna know why.”

Peggy sighs, making sure none of the drying dishes will topple over as she hangs up her towel. “I suppose I’ve never understood the appeal.”

Daniel shrugs. “Escapism? Momentary reprieve?”

“But the same thing can be accomplished through a book,” Peggy says, “and then I’m not limited by whomever they cast to play the roles. I can let my imagination do the work for me.”

“True,” Daniel says, “but there are some things that words can’t really do when they’re just on paper. Sometimes you need the nuance of spoken word to really get everything out of a certain situation.”

Peggy squints. “Why does this sound suspiciously like how you argued for Dooley to give us the recordings of the interrogations as opposed to just the transcripts?”

The innocent shrug and the look he gives her fool absolutely no one.

Peggy switches tactics, perching one hand on her hip. “Why do you enjoy it, then?”

“I’ve always found them to be a bit better at holding my attention.” Daniel gestures with his hand. “Not just my imagination, but my sight. The sound. The music of it. Helps me flush everything out.”

“A more complete experience, then.”

Daniel nods. “Plus, it’s not just the picture itself. It’s going out, late at night, to see a show. It’s…you know, it’s its own deal.”

He pushes off the counter, taking Peggy’s hands in his. “It’s walking back late at night,” he murmurs, “your head buzzing. Someone special in your arms, both of your hearts still beating fast.”

Peggy smiles when he takes her into his arms. She’s learned that Daniel can be very persuasive when he wants.

“It’s sitting in a room full of people and only being able to pay attention to the person right next to you.” Daniel rests his chin on her shoulder. “It’s being able to share a story with someone.”

He pulls back, that terribly cocky smirk on his face. “Can’t really do that with a book, now can you?”

Peggy huffs. “Oh, alright.” She raises an eyebrow at Daniel’s childlike excitement. “You’re certainly eager.”

“Come on, Peg,” Daniel laughs, leaning forward to press a quick kiss to her cheek, “let me share a story with you?”

Well, that’s just not fair. How the hell is she supposed to say no to that?

They choose next Friday. Daniel picks the picture, buys the tickets. Peggy picks the restaurant. They discuss the last of the work plans over pasta and garlic bread until Daniel reaches across the table to cover her hand midway through a discussion of their current case.

“Peggy,” he chides gently, amusement sparkling in his eyes, “no more work talk tonight, okay? Take the night off, please.”

Peggy protests halfheartedly until Daniel gives her those puppy-dog eyes that she swears do not work.

“Oh, alright,” she relents, “I suppose one night won’t throw us overboard.”

“It won’t,” Daniel promises, “but it will do you some good. Now,” he continues, picking up his fork again, “tell me about the current book you’re reading and how stupid the characters are.”

They make playful jabs at mystery tropes until they’re finished, carrying on as they walk down the block to the theater. The night is young, the sun just setting behind the horizon. The air is still warm from its rays, bathing the street in a soft haze that makes the streetlights glow a little fuzzier at the edges. Peggy finds that as their conversation meanders, she cares less and less about trying to follow it, letting Daniel’s arm in hers hold her steady as they fade into the nightlife.

“Right here,” Daniel says, sweeping them through the doors. “This way, I think.”

“Have you been here before?”

“Once,” Daniel says, “came with Rose after I lost a bet.”

“You should know better than to take a bet against Rose,” Peggy laughs.

“Yeah, yeah,” Daniel mutters as they step into the auditorium, “it wasn’t a big deal.”

“What was the bet?”

“Doesn’t matter.”

“Daniel,” she laughs, poking his shoulder as they sit down, “tell me.”

“Alright, alright.” Daniel lays his crutch out of the way. “It was a stupid filing competition. Who could finish their stack of paperwork first.”

“Why on earth would you take that bet against Rose?”

“Because if I could suffer through Thompson and Krezminski’s filing,” Daniel shoots back, “I could damn well suffer through my own.”

Peggy laughs, conceding. The New York office did not exactly have the best reputation for scrupulous filing. “And you lost and came here?”

“Rose wanted to see the noir based on The Brick Foxhole,” Daniel explains, “it was called ‘Crossfire’ or something.”

Peggy makes a noise of understanding, glancing around. The place is filling up nicely, even though it’s not quite full. Daniel follows her gaze.

“Normally the shows get fuller as the night goes on,” he murmurs, “picked an earlier time so we wouldn’t get caught in the crowd.”

Peggy nods in thanks, settling into her chair. Soon enough, the lights start to dim and the screen lights up. The film begins to roll and Daniel carefully nudges her shoulder. She looks over to see him staring at her hopefully, his hand laying open in the space between their seats. She tries to pretend she isn’t blushing when he smiles warmly as she takes it.

It’s dark, she can get away with it.

As always, her trust in Daniel is not misplaced. The picture is, indeed, a mystery story. Something about a female spy returning from abroad to team up with an older detective, trying to find out what’s happened to her missing husband. The characters, while…limited, perhaps, by the constraints of the medium, are interesting enough that Peggy finds herself furrowing her brow in concentration as she tries to figure out the story before the characters do. She hears Daniel chuckle a few times when nothing funny has happened on the screen and glances over, raising an eyebrow.

“You’ve got your focused face on,” he whispers, leaning close so as not to disturb the other movie-goers, “you enjoying it?”

“Don’t be smug,” she whispers back.

“I’m not,” he defends, leaning back a little, the flickering light from the screen showing a warm smile, “I’m happy.”

Unfortunately for Peggy, this time when she turns away, the screen is bright enough that she can’t hide her blush.

She figures out it was the husband fairly easily. He had faked his own death, it turns out, and has secretly sided with the enemy, becoming the very antagonist the spy and the detective were attempting to vanquish. She does understand what Daniel was talking about; the nuances of the actor’s faces convey things she has no idea how to put into words, the music in the background makes her heart beat faster when tensions rise, and she finds her work instincts taking over, getting frustrated when the camera won’t pan down far enough to let her see the whole room.

She keeps a hold of Daniel’s hand the whole time.

Right before the climax, there’s a quiet scene. The spy is standing by the window, looking out over the city. The detective comes in behind her, shutting the door.

“I don’t know why he did it,” the spy sniffs, folding her arms, “I don’t know why he decided to go off and join the people he signed up to fight.”

“People do crazy things,” the detective mutters, coming up behind the spy, “for crazy reasons.”

“Even go to war?”

Peggy scoffs at the melodramatic delivery.

“Even go to war,” the detective agrees, looking at the spy. “You know that, right?”

“I don’t expect you to understand,” the spy says, making Peggy scoff again. Honestly. “I went to war because I had nothing. Because it took everything from me and I had to try and take some of it back.”

Oh.

“And you didn’t go to war,” the spy cries, whirling around to point a trembling finger at the detective, “so how could you know? What would you go to war for?”

“I’d go to war for you.”

Ah. There it is.

The husband gets caught, the detective kisses the spy, the screen fades out.

“Well,” Daniel says, turning to Peggy as the other people start to get up, “what did you think?”

“Why didn’t they realize it was the husband when they initially found his draft card?”

Daniel rolls his eyes fondly, getting to his feet, grabbing his crutch, and starting out of the theatre, still pulling Peggy by the hand. She keeps up her ‘review’ of the story as they walk back along the street. It’s cooler now, the breeze ruffling her hair, the indigo sky turning brisk where the streetlights glow amber. They chat idly about the story, what they liked, what they didn’t, lapsing into silence when they run out of things to say.

Peggy glanced down at their entwined arms. Daniel is warm against the gentle breeze.

“Peggy?”

They stop, Daniel turning to face her with a look of concern on his face. “Everything okay?”

“Hmm? Oh, yes,” Peggy says quickly, “just thinking.”

“Uh-huh.” Daniel squeezes her arm gently. “I know you better than that. Come on, tell me.”

“It’s silly.”

“If it’s worrying you, it’s not.”

Peggy smiles at the sincerity in his voice. “It was one of the scenes,” she confesses, “the one where they were…at the window.”

Daniel curses under his breath. “Yeah, sorry ‘bout that. I tried to pick a picture where there wouldn’t be a lot of that, but, uh, guess we can’t escape from it.”

“No, no, it’s not that.” Peggy shakes her head. “I just…it reminded me of…something.”

Daniel’s face falls, stepping closer. “I didn’t mean to make you sad, Peg, or to remind you of—“

“Not Steve,” Peggy clarifies, smiling a little when Daniel’s shoulders slump in relief, “just…how I got started.”

Daniel nods, accepting the answer and gesturing to the sidewalk in front of them. Peggy accepts his invitation to keep walking, the slight daze from the movie beginning to sap some of her strength. She leans more heavily into Daniel who comes a little closer to support her, sharing their warmth.

“I get what you mean,” he says out of nowhere, “about that scene. It, uh, well…it had a good question in it.”

At Peggy’s quizzical look, he elaborates. “About what people go to war for.”

“Ah.”

Yes, well, that is quite a question, isn’t it?

“That was quite the declaration,” she says, trying to lighten the mood, “the detective saying he’d go to war for her?”

“Yeah.” Daniel’s crutch clicks against the sidewalk. “That’s one way to do it.”

“Well,” Peggy murmurs, “let’s hope we never have to worry about that. One war in my lifetime is quite enough for me.”

Daniel chuckles. “I don’t know if I’d say that.”

Peggy stops them, frowning. “What on earth does that mean?”

Daniel stops too, turning to face her. “Peg, what does that quote mean to you?”

“Pardon?”

“When the detective said it,” Daniel says, “what did it mean?”

Peggy blinks. “That the detective was willing to go to war for the spy.”

“So she wouldn’t have to or to fight alongside her?”

Peggy’s words die in her throat. Daniel scratches the back of his head and takes a deep breath. When he looks up at her, the trust and faith in his eyes is enough to take her breath away.

“If working at the SSR has taught me anything, it’s that war isn’t just two sides shooting at each other on a battlefield,” he says. “It’s information, it’s secrets, it’s covert operations and talking and teamwork.”

He gestures between the two of them. “We can fight wars every day at our jobs, just by doing paperwork and making phone calls. Hell, we’ve fought wars by doing that.”

“Daniel,” Peggy says, holding out her hands, “what…what are you saying?”

Daniel takes a step closer. “I’m saying I’ve already gone to war for you, Peg. I fought the whole damn War Department for you. And yeah, I’d do it again.”

He holds out a hand when she opens her mouth. “And before you say anything, I need to tell you that quote means something different for me.”

Peggy closes her mouth, waiting as Daniel comes close enough for her to see the glow of the streetlight reflected in his eyes.

“I would go to war to follow you, Peg,” he says, “because I know damn well you’re going anyway and I’m sure as hell not stupid enough to try and stop you.”

“Oh, Daniel…”

“Just…” and it’s his turn to blush, the tips of his ears going red as he coughs into his fist. “Let me share the story with you?”

How is she supposed to say no?

Instead, she kisses him, bathed in the warm glow of the streetlight, until neither of them can say anything.

[snorinlauren]

The Best Horror Movies Streaming On Netflix Right Now

The number of digital platforms on which fans of horror movies can find a good scare is just as frightening as the films they have available to stream. In fact, there is even one that specializes in bringing the best the genre has to offer (and then some). Of course, for those who only have so much time and money at their disposal, settling on Netflix to help deliver the spooks would not be a mistake.

There are enough horror movies available on the popular platform to keep you streaming into the wee hours of the night, mainly because you will not be able to sleep. Among the many fears you would be facing during this binge with iconically creepy classics, modern masterpieces of the macabre, and even some of Netflix’s own ominous originals, one you should not have to worry about is the fear of disappointment.

That being said, we understand that some phobias are more challenging to get over than others, so allow us to be a beacon of despair and point you in the right direction of what the best horror movies currently available to stream on Netflix. We figured that 13 would be an appropriate number, starting with an influential cult favorite that arguably pioneered the “cabin in the woods” thriller.

The Evil Dead (1981)

A weekend getaway and an old cabin becomes an unrelenting nightmare for one man (Bruce Campbell) after his four friends are possessed by an ancient spirit that turns them into grotesque and cruel creatures.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Writer and director Sam Raimi became the patron saint of low budget indie horror with The Evil Dead, that remains a timeless classic of astonishing influence that spawned two campy sequels, a brilliantly brutal remake, and a hilarious TV series that serves as a perfect send-off for Bruce Campbell's chainsaw-handed hero, Ash Williams.

Stream The Evil Dead on Netflix here.

Poltergeist (1982)

A family seeks help when their youngest daughter is kidnapped by malevolent spirits that have invaded their suburban home.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: From producer Steven Spielberg and directed by The Texas Chainsaw Massacre creator Tobe Hooper (well, depending on who you talk to), Poltergeist is an essential haunted house picture for how it expertly taps into traumas that people of all ages an relate to and may lead you to develop new fears as well, such as television static, perhaps.

Stream Poltergeist on Netflix here.

Child’s Play (1988)

A single mother (Catherine Hicks) enlists the aid of a homicide detective (Chris Sarandon) after discovering that the doll she bought for her young son (Alex Vincent) is possessed by the soul of a dead serial killer (Brad Dourif).

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Before there was Annabelle, there was Chucky, who may not have been the first toy responsible for giving children nightmares, but certainly became every horror fan's favorite of that kind upon the release of Child's Play, a classic slasher but pokes great fun at modern commercialism.

Stream Child's Play on Netflix here.

The Silence Of The Lambs (1991)

To catch a deranged murderer who skins his victims, ambitious FBI trainee Clarice Starling (Academy Award winner Jodie Foster) enlists Hannibal Lecter (Academy Award winner Anthony Hopkins), a former psychiatrist and notorious cannibal, to help get into the mind of a criminal.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: While the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences may prefer their choice for the Best Picture Oscar in 1992 not be called "horror," with Anthony Hopkins' chilling performance and breathlessly suspenseful direction by Jonathan Demme, it is hard to imagine The Silence of the Lambs in any other category.

Stream The Silence of the Lambs on Netflix here.

Candyman (1992)

A graduate student (Virginia Madsen) investigating Chicago myths for her college thesis becomes especially interested on the story of a supernatural entity with a hook for a hand whom locals believe can be summoned by saying his name five times.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Tony Todd created quite a "buzz" in black horror history as the title character of Candyman, a creation from legendary writer Clive Barker based on the deliciously creepy concept of an urban legend whose existence depends on those who believe in him.

Stream Candyman on Netflix here.

Insidious (2011)

After their eldest son (Ty Simpkins) inexplicably falls into something even doctors hesitate to call a coma, a family (led by Patrick Wilson and Rose Byrne) begins to fall prey to a relentless evil that seems to follow them whenever they try to escape.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Director James Wan and writer Leigh Whannell, the dynamic duo behind Saw who have since gone onto great successes on their own, created an indelibly frightening new classic to the haunted house sub-genre with Insidious, particularly for a nearly unprecedented twist that might actually have you thankful when it keeps you up at night.

Stream Insidious on Netflix here.

Sinister (2012)

Desperate for another bestseller, a true crime writer (Ethan Hawke) moves his family into a house where a disturbing murder took place, which he plans to research for his latest masterpiece, only to learn that the truth behind the incident is much worse than he could have imagined.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Oscar-nominee Ethan Hawke became an unexpected "scream king" after playing the tragic hero of Sinister, from Doctor Strange and The Exorcism of Emily Rose director Scott Derrickson, which is, arguably, the most ferociously unsettling supernatural crime thriller ever made.

Stream Sinister on Netflix here.

Creep (2014)

An amateur filmmaker accepts a request over Craigslist to film a terminally ill man's final message to his son, but quickly comes to regret the decision when his host's progressively concerning actions lead him to question if he is the one about to expire.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Conceived by its own stars Mark Duplass and Patrick Brice (the latter of which also directs), Creep is an underrated found footage gem that mostly lives up to its name (with a almost equally haunting 2017 follow-up that is supposedly the second of a planned trilogy), but the biggest shocker is how mumblecore pioneers Duplass and Brice essentially improvised the entire story from scratch.

Stream Creep on Netflix here.

The Invitation (2015)

A man brings his girlfriend to a dinner party hosted by his ex-wife and her new lover, but is immediately, and unshakably, convinced that something sinister is afoot.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: As this tenuous, high-wire act from director Karen Kusama progresses, you may not be sure who among these party guests, even Logan Marshall Green's protagonist, is worth your trust, but one thing I can confidently guarantee is is that the final moment of The Invitation will rupture your brain.

Stream The Invitation on Netflix here.

Train To Busan (2016)

An emotionally distant businessman's commute for his young daughter to visit her mother turns out to be a one-way trip into hell when someone carrying a virus turning people into mindless cannibals invites herself on board.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Not only is the live-action debut of Korean filmmaker Sang-ho Yeon’s one of the most exciting and clever zombie films in recent memory, but Train to Busan, which has spawned a highly anticipated sequel, also succeeds as a moving thriller about the sacrifices we make for ones we love.

Stream Train to Busan on Netflix here.

Terrifier (2017)

Two beautiful late night partygoers (Jenna Kanell and Catherine Corcoran) are in for the worst Halloween of their lives when they fall prey to an unfriendly clown who has plenty of sadistic trick and treats in store for them.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: If you ask me, Pennywise has nothing on Art the Clown (David Howard Thornton), the future slasher icon whom the title of Terrifier appropriately refers to for his whimsically morbid imagination and tenacious blood thirst that makes director Damien Leone’s third feature a masterpiece of unapologetic shock and "ugh."

Stream Terrifier on Netflix here.

In The Tall Grass (2019)

A pregnant woman (Laysla De Oliveira) and her brother (Avery Whitted) follow a young boy's cry for help into a large field of high-growing grass, but it soon it becomes apparent that there is no way out.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: Based on a novella by father/son writing duo Stephen King and Joe Hill, In the Tall Grass is a survivalist thriller with startling fantasy, engrossing mystery, and a menacing performance by "scream king" and The Conjuring star Patrick Wilson that makes this Netflix original one of the coolest surprises in horror of its year.

Stream In the Tall Grass on Netflix here.

Tucker And Dale Vs. Evil (2010)

An idyllic vacation in newly purchased cabin turns into "a real doozy of a day" for a pair of well-meaning hillbillies (Alan Tudyk and Tyler Labine) after an awkward misunderstanding with some young campers leads to a bloodbath.

Why It's A Good Option for Horror Fans: The old slasher trope of shady country folk is turned on its head in a most brilliantly hilarious, yet uncompromisingly graphic, way in Tucker and Dale vs. Evil, which may prove to be perfect way to end your Netflix horror binge: with a morbid laugh.

Stream Tucker And Dale Vs. Evil on Netflix here.

What do you think? Have we captured all the best haunts on Netflix, or is the absence of your own favorite horror flick the scariest thing you saw on our list? Let us know in the comments and be sure to check back for additional information and updates on the freakiest genre in cinema, as well as even more rattling recommendations of movies and TV shows you can stream, here on CinemaBlend.

What is you favorite horror film currently available to stream on Netflix?

[all-brown-everything]

My favourite Indian films of 2018

Sorry for the wait this year. 2018 in the movies mirrored my own life a lot; the films on the list are films to love, make you feel something human, and they force you to take their characters and hold them close to your chest as if they were your own. While the most interesting mainstream movies from South Asia over previous years on this blog have excelled when they chose to experiment with the language of cinema itself, the 10 I’ve written about here have, similar to great literature, embraced pain, longing, love and everything else that comes with being alive.

10. Theevandi

I’ve seen this film being described as an “anti-smoking movie.” I couldn’t disagree more. It’s a story about the nature of habit (rather than the disease of ‘addiction’), of locating the source of your personality, your soul, and trying to change it against the will of nature. During my time in India this year, nothing brought more joy than an ice burst and cutting tea at the side of the road, perching on the side of the pavement and watching life carry on around you. And while this is a film with a main character who wants to quit smoking, it isn’t about cancer. It isn’t about that horrible sooty smell at the end of your fingers, or yellowing teeth or a decreased sperm count. It’s about how something as innocuous as a tube of rolled up tobacco hanging out of your mouth can act as a fragile crutch for the entire weight of the world.

9. Laila Majnu

Like many of my favourites this year (and every year), this re-telling of one of South Asia’s most important romances wants to know what love is. Here, we see love not as a generous, giving emotion, but as pure greed. With one of Bollywood’s most gorgeous soundtracks, that bleeds furiously out of every frame, and a constant sparkling gleam of glamour over these gorgeous young actors and the Kashmiri hills they prance around in, I enjoyed this enough just based on the commercial tropes it toys with for fun. But its real beauty lies in its brave and painful final declaration; that the most divine love may connect you to God and remove your soul from your body, but it will destroy you and your connections to the Earth, as the cruelest form of asceticism.

8. Cake

I’m including a Pakistani movie (again) because our film industries were birthed under one national identity, and I don’t see the studios of Karachi as any more culturally distant from Mumbai’s Film City than Kodambakkam. Moving to Cake, this stunning portrait of a dysfunctional family surprised me against all my instincts that it was a Western-facing production clearly aimed at piercing its way into festivals and a patronising ‘World Cinema’ bracket. It is in fact, a study of shifting societal politics in an increasingly extreme and polarised World, of figuring out where your values stand in the midst of religion, feudalism and globalisation, and accepting that when these heavy, abstract concepts weigh down on your shoulders, it is the human beings around you who will feel the strain first.

7. Golak, Bugni, Bank Te Batua

I really love Punjabi cinema. Seeing it come into its own and reclaim its cultural narratives and aesthetics from bastardizing Bollywood (where now even a film set in rural Gujarat will feature a Punjabi language song) has brought a lot of joy. Now here comes a  happy little film not set on preaching the glory of Sikkhi or telling an epic tale of brave warriors or earnest farmers, but on bringing us into the lives of a middle class Hindu Punjabi family in a small mohalla of a tier 2 city. And these aren’t the Hindu “Punjabis” of a Bollywood movie set in Chandni Chowk, who might throw in a “tussi” or “tuadi” here and there at the most. These are real people with a real culture, as intertwined with Punjab and their Sikh neighbours as they are separate. The film doesn’t patronise them by drawing humour from their novel identity; the situational character-based slapstick and witty back-and-forth theatrical dialogues exist in a warm parallel with the “World” of the movie. And then the lives of these people change in one instant as demonetisation hits, and we are hilariously reminded that whether you’re Hindu or Sikh, Northern or Southern, you are (unfortunately) still in India.

6. C/o Kancharapalem

I won't say this film stood out as a "Telugu movie", as such slight, subtle films are an anomaly no matter what language they're made in or how brash those other films produced in the same mother tongue may be. These small and quiet tales, with their shy characters who live at the fringes of society, whether that mean they are Muslim prostitutes or simple middle class teachers carving out a living in a small village, are special because they manage to transmit such humanity without stirring from the dark alleyways or shaded courtyards where they take place. Not every film needs to stand tall like an intimdsting Tolstoy tome; some can be as unassuming as an RK Narayan novella and still make us feel like they're an epic.

5. Pyaar Prema Kaadhal

Let's be honest. Casting two leads from a reality show, putting heart shaped balloons in your posters and deciding on the title "Love, Love, Love" pretty much screams "trash" doesn't it? But here was a humbling reminder that Indian popular culture can surprise you in the most pleasant of ways. These two good-looking young wannabe-stars and their social media followings represent so much about the "new India", a steadfastly singular culture (or cultures) whizzing through the fiery hoops of globalisation at breakneck speed, coming to terms with a mixed up value system, raging sexual frustration and an ever widening class gap, all of which have left a generation feeling more connected yet more alienated than ever before. This is 'Pyaar, Prema, Kaadhal', a flawed and horny love story, sweating with tension and all the repulsive angst of human emotion, yet with the glamorous musical heart of Indian cinema still beating loudly underneath.

4. Manmarziyaan

There was as much to love about 'Manmarziyaan' as there was to hate. The age-old filmi love triangle rears its head again, only this time with characters who are more manipulative and frustrating than any you've seen in a "mainstream" movie before. But while the film never forces you to judge (at times leaving you confused about whether you're actually supposed to like any of these people) it demands that you engage. It's encouraged some of the finest writing on cinema I've seen in recent years, and such an unashamedly "Bollywood" film inspiring this thrilling thought and analysis from our finest critics (whether their judgement is kind or not) warrants its inclusion on this list alone. Then there's the way its incredible soundtrack weaves in and out of scenes like the characters own breaths, the way life changing moments are obscured from the script by deafening silences and acutely observed minutiae, and of course THAT lead performance. I'm not sure if I "liked" it or not, but I sure as hell can't wait to watch it again.

3. Pari

The better the film, the harder it is to write about. 'Pari' is rich with metaphor. While being a ghost story (and a damn good one) merely on the surface, it has plenty to say about the way our society treats women, poses the question of if we can truly be born evil, and even critiques our savage treatment of "the other" in a global society where more of us are on the run than settled in our homes. But I think its biggest strength is that while it challenges you to reach into the very centre of your being and take a look at yourself and the World around you, its craft and screenwriting is so good that not at any moment does it give you a second to realise that's what you're doing.

2. Rangasthalam

'Rangasthalam' is so great. Like really really great. Once an innocuous muscle man, Ram Charan has channelled his inner Dhanush and located his physicality, writhing and slanging his way into the mind and body of the quintessential South Indian rural hero, hoisting his lungi and flicking his beedi into one of the most visceral and truly cinematic masala movies in living memory. The thumping pace and kinetic choreography (both of the rousing song sequences and the busy, lived-in frames of the rest of the movie) evoke a dusty, violent world with the same panache of Ameer in 'Paruthiveeran' or Sasikumar in 'Subramaniyapuram', while the moustache twirling dialogues and meticulous emotional beats offer as much pure fun as a "Dabangg" or a "Khakee" or any classic Hindi masala movie. I've read pieces linking the cinema of 'Rangasthalam' to film noir traditions, but to me it simply proved that the masala genre still has as much excitement to offer as any other.

1. Mukkabaaz

I'll remember 2018 as the year that Anurag Kashyap, previously India's frontrunner in the realm of "interesting" (but more often headscatching) cinema, stopped thinking with his very big brain and instead used his even bigger heart. His most straightforward film is undoubtedly his best, Hollywood-esque in its writing but firmly Indian in its sentiment. The scale is small - empty boxing arenas, bleak winding village paths and a cast plucked from the TV screen - but its emotions are pure opera. This is a timeless film, and though it laughs at the ridiculousness of modern India, poking a nasty smug finger at caste oppression, petty politics and the bureaucratic nightmare of simply trying to stay alive, it defies analysis. Much like the song at the centre of the story, the violently stunning 'Paintra', it only asks that you feel. And what more could we want from cinema?

I've had so much fun at the movies this year. From dancing to Dilbar in the cheap seats of G7 in Bandra to reciting Dhanush's Maari 2 dialogues at the bus stop outside Ilford Cineworld, Indian movies have continued to punctuate my life and bring me more joy than they have any right to. I can't wait to do this all again this year. What were the films that stirred you over the last 12 months? Let me know. Xx

[featuristicfilm]

Movies of Fall/Winter 2019 (and 2020) that I’m really excited to see

With awards season kicking in, the movie release slate is about to bring us some incredible pieces of cinema. There are many films this year that sound fun, interesting, profound and promising so here is a shortened list of the ones that get me giddy with most anticipation. TOP 5 let’s go! (and a few honourable mentions)

5. Lucy in the Sky (Noah Hawley, December 6th, 2019, UK)

Randomly stumbling upon its trailer on Youtube, I was surprised as to why I haven’t heard anything about this film at all because it actually looks super intriguing. Even though the notion of a space movie can feel fairly worn-out, and there is only so much originality you can bring to that kind of concept, Lucy in the Sky looks like it’s going to be a completely shifted take on space dynamics and exploration. In fact, it seems it’s going to be a story fully centred around one character’s individual, self-reflective, very personal journey, with space acting only as a narrative device that creates the background, rather than it being at the forefront of the film’s events. Natalie Portman seems completely in her shoes in this trope of a study of a character who’s deeply damaged and emotionally transformed by whatever trials she undergoes. The trailer is put together so perfectly as well. It tells just enough information for us to understand what is the movie’s premise while also creating a dramatic and suspenseful energy. Also, to me the imagery feels very grounded and serious but also kind of weird, daring and eccentric in some shots, so if the creators managed to balance a kind of art-house approach with some epic, grandiose visual elements it is going to be one hell of a film. To be fair, I was kind of excited just ‘cause it’s Natalie Portman but the more I think about the story the more interesting and promising it sounds. Unfortunately, it comes out October 4th which means its going to have a biiiiit of a competitor in the box-office in the form of Joker.

4. Jojo Rabbit (Taika Waititi, January 3rd, 2020, UK)

This one exhibits several traits that make the film very enticing. First of all, of course, the subject matter. I think it’s fair to say that a little boy interacting with Adolf Hitler in the shape of an imaginary friend is as crazy and amusing an idea as it gets. And, of course, many of us have our understanding and reaction towards the people and events of the WW2 era but to have that portrayed in a comedy genre is definitely going to cast a whole new light on the subject, at least as seen on the big screen. This will most likely be a story exploring harsh realism through imagination and fantasy but also through the earnest and innocent eyes of a child and it will likely be a surprising take and not what anyone expects it to be. Due to many reasons, it is, obviously, going to be a widespread conversation piece and for that alone I have to see it. The other thing that perfectly complements the idea of this project, is the man himself, Taika Waititi. I don’t think a better combination between the material and the creator can emerge because it is hard to imagine someone else taking on such a bold proposition. He’s just the type of writer and director that is so unique in style and taste that you just believe anything he makes is going to turn out special in one way or another, and having creative will and freedom and integrity might be exactly what made this whole thing possible in the first place. Plus Waititi himself is playing Hitler which, I’d imagine, just raises the scale of humour and energy and dynamics of the whole piece. 

3. Jumanji: The Next Level (Jake Kasden, December 13th, 2019, UK)

I know, a not so popular of a choice. Compared to the way every other film is awaited based on their technical and creative merits, with this one I am so genuinely eager to experience the fun. After all the amusement Jumanji: Into the Jungle brought to the franchise, I don’t see why anybody wouldn’t be excited about this next instalment. I absolutely loved that film, it was so so so funny and entertaining! The story was really great because not only did it bring that fantasy and adventure aspect once again but also the way the avatar/game player narrative approach was incorporated was so unique. So, after seeing the trailers for this sequel, it sparked even more excitement to see how else can they possibly spin that concept. With that in mind, bringing in Danny DeVito and Danny Glover, well regarded comedic figures and over all talents, to the mix is genius. Them trapped in the bodies of Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart is, honestly, a hilarious thought and having old guys interact with the other teenage friends and deal with challenges in the desert, jungle, mountain tops will be no less than a thrilling journey. I think this is going to be just the right film to kind of step back from all the serious and deep dramas that will be in full motion for Oscar season at the time, and switch to some good-old light-hearted cinema. With holidays coming up during its release (December 13th) - nothing better than to go see a fun family movie. And if the playfulness and humour combined with the fond spirit of the story lands at least the same way as it did with the previous film, it’s going to win over people’s hearts and probably the box-office. Can’t wait to just fully enjoy the action and immerse myself in the wonder of this adventure all over again!

2. Joker (Todd Philips, October 4th, 2019, UK)

I have to admit, while initially I was very interested in this new iteration of Joker purely on a general movie-goer level, it was maintained and gradually piqued as time went on largely due to everyone talking about it so much. The sheer amount of hype and anticipation this announcement has managed to create is baffling. Every film coverage outlet, magazine, blog was discussing it. And maybe it’s just that I follow a lot of superhero genre loving people and maybe the idea of this film, in fact, doesn’t concern the general viewer as much, still it has kept many eagerly waiting. The thing that gives it an edge, though, is the fact that this is not simply going to be your general superhero action blockbuster but rather an intense psychological drama reflecting on certain societal issues applied to a familiar mythology. The character everyone knows as a rival to Batman here seems to be a troubled man, beaten down literally, as well as emotionally due to social injustice and his own mental complications. Therefore, this film will probably not rely on epic showdowns and comic tropes as much but actually will give the concept of an ‘origin story’ a different meaning. It’s exciting that DC took it upon themselves to make a bold and creatively charged version of their beloved character, and with Joaquin Phoenix as the lead and Todd Philips as director I think they can be confident about their vision. Whether it is going to be received well or not, that’s the question. While it did already receive heaps of acclaim, including the Golden Lion in the Venice Film Festival, the early audience reviews are quite widely mixed. Nonetheless, it is very intriguing. I have to say, it’s shaping out to be one of those films, and performances, in particular, that have the ability to stay in the minds of the viewers long after. Not long to wait now and we’ll finally see if it lives up to what it set out for. ‘Cause let me tell you, the standard’s high, for sure.

Knives Out (Rian Johnson, November 29th, 2019, UK)

For the longest, this film and Joker were up to par for the number one place on my list of the most awaited movies of the rest of year. Every trailer amped up the excitement so much more and, ultimately, when I felt that I could’t stop thinking about Knives Out, counting days ‘till it’s release, I knew which one has won me over. No surprise, though. I absolutely love whodunnits!!! There’s just a certain thrill to a mystery or a detective style film that cannot be found anywhere else. There’s always so much room for exploration of characters and narratives and the story can take so many directions. If a screenplay for a murder mystery is done right, and all the twists and turns are unexpected and smartly placed, it’s just the best. I also love the interactive aspect of it. Even though I know I can’t change the way it all plays out, I have the ability to have my own reasoning and conclusions that I can apply in my head as the events role out. So with this film I was instantly hooked. Chris Evans’ attachment to the project definitely helped me discover it, though. I’m a huge fan of his and I was curious already to see what kind of role he is about to take on next after the culmination of his journey as Captain America in the MCU. Since I find him to be a very intelligent actor, I think I can trust his judgement on what kind of material is interesting to explore and what kind of people are worth collaborating with. That in mind, this cast looks absolutely incredible! Some really experienced ‘veterans’ in Toni College, Jamie Lee Curtis, Christopher Plummer, a big big star Daniel Craig, as well as some less known but promising names such as Ana de Armas and Katherine Langford, for example. And that’s just to name a few… Wow. With the nature and genre of the story, given it’s a suspenseful mystery but with a comedic flare, a good ensemble of performers is crucial, as is their dynamic. Hopefully, writer/director Rian Johnson has managed to create a rich, powerful and unique film that will entertain and won’t disappoint. I do believe that will be the case, as that much talent on screen and behind the camera is usually a recipe for success.

If not for the short list… I have so many other films that have caught my attention and that will absolutely have me in the cinema seat on opening night. These include Bombshell whose team is worth an applause for that amazingly well put teaser trailer; Just Mercy, for a true story that will no doubt have an impact on me and for what seem to be astounding performances by the lead cast; and Marriage Story because it will make me cry… Stories about family, love and relationships always hit close home, this one might break my heart but there’s pain and joy in life all the time, I look forward to seeing the often difficult reality reflected on screen.

[onecoloraway]

"But did you see that?" super creepy Ma che cazzo di posto è? edition with 4.4 Halloween

On today's episode I'll only be looking at about one minute and 20 seconds of the whole clip, specifically from the moment Marti and Nico enter the abandoned building through the raised gate right until they climb the stairs to the pool. Why?

First of all, because you'll find plenty of good meta about the rest of the clip in the tag (one of my favourites is the one from Anne @skamitanne and second, because I appreciate Besse's artistic ass talent and the mini horror-film sequence he created here.

Until they reach the pool upstairs we basically have Marti following Nico who looks kind of scary in the dark, if I may say so. Very charming and attractive, but also quite qoth-like.

I like to think every line Besse decided to include is there for a reason and the characters are not just throwing around empty lines as fillers until the scene gets to the highly awaited moment. So I'll mention some of these from this short scene.

Nico asks Marti "non hai sempre voluto un terzo braccio mutante?" (Haven't you always wanted a third mutant arm?) - which ok, it might be a stretch, but to me sounds like him alluding to his condition. Many of the heroes in modern fiction are mutants of some sort: they are born with/acquire a condition or special ability that seems abnormal to the outside world, but ultimately becomes their strenght, their superpower - it's portrayed as a gift. Nico can't reveal himself yet, but I find it interesting that he throws this idea so casually at Marti maybe just to playfully check his reaction. And it is positive!

The sequence where Marti is looking for Nico in his white cloak reminds me of Mina looking for her friend Lucy in the 1992 Dracula movie only to find her being taken by the creature count Dracula transformed into.

Marti says he's about to shit his pants and if that's not a clue that this is indeed a mini horror movie, I don't know what is.

The bit where Nico warns Marti not to step into the acid is always one of my favourites just because of how FAST Marti reacts to it and asks Che acido? He replies so quickly, they honestly sound like a married couple who by now know how to react to literally everything the other has to say. I love them!

I was wondering why Bessegato would put a line with acid in there (it might be that there were these cans turned over and they improvised it, but let me have this, ok?) so I looked into it and some of the vampire stories I came across mention them burning their victims' bodies in acid after they were done with them. :O ok.

Marti even says this all looks like a horror film and the next two shots are my favourites because they are tropes specific to gothic cinema and have their own meaning.

Marti following Nico without knowing much about his intentions is very similar to a scene that has been redone is almost every Dracula movie version.

Then come the stairs, one of the most iconic symbols that signify the vampire's power over it's 'victim', his sexual desires and also the point of no return.

Marti ascends these steps with Nico, follows him into the unknown because he's attracted to the mystery of it. He doesn't even care where Nico is taking him, what they'll be doing, as long as they're together. The suspence is almost addictive, it's seductive and exciting.

At this point in the story we are still not fully aware about Nico's intentions. At least that's what their costumes want to allude to. We know from their almost kiss that they are both definitely interested in one another, but we, like Marti, are unsure how it will work out, what he's all about. He's still with his girlfriend, but is willing to ditch her with Marti - who goes in head first and is willing to take a risk, find out who this guy is.

But as soon as they reach the upper level by the pool and their costumes come off, you realise this isn't the story of a predator and it's prey. Nico is not the mysterious, ambiguous, charming seducer and Marti is certainly not the innocent victim of his charm. They are both equal in this, they both want the same thing, they're both gone for one another. Two idiot goofballs. Their dynamic is irresistible. Nico is his no chill, quirky mess and Marti is an especially loud version of himself, barely able to control his excitement about what's happening.

I realise the point of this post is not very obvious. It might just be me trying to show another of Ludo Besse's genius attempts at a cinematic parallel in the masterpiece of his short Halloween clip.

You are welcome - as always - to add some of your favourite lines and scenes from the clip.

[qguardian]

Here’s to you women of Endgame/Marvel

To Brie Larson: Thank you for embodying Captain Marvel. Thank you for never flinching in the face of the wave of misogyny thrown your way. Thank you for lifting the dreams of girls and women everywhere and still speaking out in the defense of others. Your presence on screen was nothing short of breathtaking and I’m so thankful to you for just being amazing. I can’t wait to see more.

To Zoe Saldana: Thank you for just being amazing. I can’t imagine how hard it is to put on all that makeup for Gamora, but I can say the MCU would be so much weaker without you. Your ability to give such a deadly character believably soft moments is a wonder to behold, and it has contributed heavily to the likability of the Guardians. So thank you for putting up with all the dressing because you have created a character that truly stands out from the MCU and from Cinema. 

To Karen Gillan: The role of a villianess who gets redeemed is a rare one, and you were so perfect for it. You took Nebula from a one off Villain to a fully fledged character that played such an important role in Endgame I was genuinely surprised. I wouldn’t have enjoyed it so much had you not played her so well. You do Villain well, you do Hero well. You’re funny and scary when necessary. Thank you for making me care about a character I never thought I would.

To Pom Klementieff: Thank you for surprising me about a character. Mantis is not a character I thought would be in it for the long haul, but I am glad I was wrong. Your acting in Infinity War was amazing and you really showed how powerful an empath Mantis truly is. And your comedy is spot on. I know Asian representation is still lacking, but I’m glad you were able to break that barrier. You are a gem and I’m looking forward to seeing more. 

To Tessa Thompson: Holy cow do I love your character. The amount of badass that radiates off you should be harnessed and used to power cities. Your fighting, your wit, your smile and laugh, everything is just a spectacular sight to behold. You really showed off what a female leader looks like, and I’m glad Endgame acknowledged that fact and put you in your proper rank. 

To Evangeline Lilly: I’m so glad you got a second movie to really show what you are capable of. I’m glad you took the trope of “perfectly capable female gets sidelined by chosen male” and smashed it to bits.You made that movie so worth it, retroactively making the first Ant Man look better.  I was so happy to see you back in Endgame. Thank you for carrying the title of first female in the title, I know your achievement got a little overshadowed by Captain Marvel, but it was an important breakthrough and you handled it like it was nothing. Well done, and thank you.

To Letitia Wright: Your role as Shuri is just so special. To see a young girl, especially a black girl, be the smartest in the room, no, the smartest on the planet, is such a breath of fresh air. You breathed such life into the character, giving her the ability to be smart, funny, and a badass fighter. Shuri’s strength comes from you and it is no small thing to say Black Panther just wouldn’t have worked as well without you. Thank you.

To Lupita Nyong’o: Little sad you weren’t in Infinity war or Endgame, not going to lie. Your role in Black Panther though was amazing though. It’s amazing how you showed the power of empathy and really drove home the message that if you are capable of helping, you should help. You always bring such a wonderful spark to all your characters and Nakia was no different. I hope you return in Black Panther 2.

To Danai Gurira: Damn I can’t even express how much I love Okoye. You were the perfect choice to play a leader of an entirely female fighting force. You showed off strength and duty without being cold. Your fighting scenes were all amazingly fun to watch. I think you might be the only actress to have a prominent scene where you are licked by a rhino followed by threatening to kill your traitor husband and my god did you make it all so iconic. Your character would not have been so easily beloved without you. Thank you. 

To Gwyneth Paltrow: You had one of the toughest roles in the MCU. You were acting across from RDJ and you not only held your own, you established yourself as a staple character. You were every bit as critical to Tony’s journey as RDJ was. You were given a stereotypical side character love interest role and made her so special. I’m glad your strength was recognized in both Iron Man 3 and Endgame because you more than deserve it. Also, your delivery of your final lines to Tony were heart-smashingly perfect. Thank you for giving us your performance.

To Angela Basset, Rene Russo, and Michelle Pfeiffer: The role of mother is a critical one and all of you were spectacular. You give heart to otherwise cold atmospheres, breathing life into stories like no other. You give love to characters who need it most. You bring a sense of home to a world of fantasy so different from our own. Thank you. 

To Natalie Portman and Emily VanCamp: Thank you for your roles. If was unfair your characters were written into the sidelines as love interests, despite both your characters having incredible strength. Your talents are priceless and your contributions will not be forgotten. 

And To Scarlet Johannson: Look, I really want you to make better acting choices. I hope you take the feedback given to you and be better in your career moving forward. But I can’t deny your achievements in the MCU. You were the first women in the super hero line up. You carried that title for all the first phase and most of the second phase. You were given a stereotype and you killed it. Your character was written wildly different from movie to movie and yet you still managed to make it as seamless as possible. You were witty, funny, heartfelt, and goddamn your death scene was heart wrenching. You paved the way for the others. You held strong, acting against RDJ and Chris Evens in their own movies, and it never felt like you were second fiddle. You achieved so much with being given so little to work with. Your presence and performance were gifts to behold, so from the bottom of my heart, thank you.  

And to every other women who has contributed to the MCU, both big and small, both on and off screen, your roles are so important to female fans everywhere. Thank you, truly, for helping bring these characters to life and give people everywhere a model to see just how strong women can be. 

“She’s not alone.”

[starwarsnonsense]

Top 10 Films of 2018 (So Far)

Since I quite like continuing old traditions, I wanted to do a post rounding up what I consider to be the ten best films of 2018 so far. This list includes a few films that came out in 2017 in the US, since they were only released here in the UK this year.

Have you seen any of the films I cover below? Have I piqued your interest in a title you might not have heard before? Let me know, and do share your favourites too!

1. Annihilation, dir. Alex Garland

This was my most anticipated film of the year, and my hype for it was more than rewarded. This is a marvellously rich and transporting science fiction film that isn’t afraid of taking the viewer to some very weird places. However, Annihilation doesn’t simply rely on its strangeness to succeed - it is also firmly rooted in its characters and themes, which has made it incredibly rewarding to return to. Natalie Portman is fantastic as Lena, and Annihilation is a brilliant showcase for her - Lena is a complex and frequently self-destructive character, riddled by guilt and regrets that shape the pulsating, luminescent world of the mysterious ‘Shimmer’ that she has to venture into. The Shimmer might seem like an environmental phenomenon at first, but it’s really more psychological, being a space that adapts according to the people who enter into it. This film overflows with fascinating and thought-provoking ideas, and it was entirely worth the hike I made over to Brooklyn to catch one of the final showings at the theatre (since Annihilation was denied a theatrical release in the UK, I made a point of seeing it while I was on holiday in New York). I think it will go down as one of the great science fiction films, and it belongs in the same conversations as 2001: A Space Odyssey and Solaris.

2. Beast, dir. Michael Pearce

This little British film - shot mostly on location in Jersey by a first-time director - was easily the biggest (and best) surprise I’ve had so far at the cinema this year. I literally had no idea this film existed until a day or so before I watched it, and that made the experience of viewing it even more wonderful. Moll (Jessie Buckley) is an isolated young woman who is stifled by her controlling family and quiet life on a remote island, as well as a secret sin that bubbles away underneath the surface. Her life is predictable - safe, repetitive and dull - until she meets Pascal, a mysterious local man who she finds she has an affinity with. However, there is a murderer haunting the island, taking the lives of young girls in the night. Who’s to blame, and what impact will the killings have on Moll and Pascal’s swiftly escalating romance? While that is a synopsis more than a review, I felt it necessary to explain the premise to try and compel you to seek this one out. Beast is raw, woozy and utterly absorbing - the love story between Moll and Pascal is one of the most passionate and gripping you’ll ever see on screen, and their chemistry is simply sensational. There’s a real gothic, fairy-tale edge to the story which appealed perfectly to my (admittedly rather niche) tastes. This is a real hidden treasure of a film - do yourself a favour and make it your mission to watch it.

3. Lady Bird, dir. Greta Gerwig

This film was so, so relatable, despite my not really having experienced an adolescence anything like “Lady Bird’s”. While the details of her life are very different from mine, I think anyone can relate to the sweeping brushstrokes - the tensions that can arise between parents and children, the thirst for freedom and independence that builds the closer you get to the final days of school, and the feelings of love and loyalty that are always there even when they’re unspoken. Greta Gerwig captures all of this and so much more with marvellous delicacy, balancing little moments that add colour and spark with more serious scenes so deftly that it’s amazing to think that this is her first feature. Lady Bird is a very specific and very beautiful film, and it’s special precisely because it feels universal even as it feels small and personal to its director. 

4. Eighth Grade, dir. Bo Burnham

This is the perfect double bill with Lady Bird, and the people who have dubbed this film “Lady Bird Jr” are right on the money. Elsie Fisher has a real star turn as the heroine Kayla, who is a very special child - she’s kind, sensitive and thoughtful, which basically means she’s my kind of superhero. But even as she is a good and sweet person, she is also going through all of the trials you’d expect a 13 year old to be facing in 2018, as she wrestles with acne, confusing feelings about super-dreamy boys, and the escalating anxiety that comes with a comment-free Instagram post. Like Lady Bird, this film succeeds in being both very specific and highly universal - the only social media I had to deal with as a teen were MySpace and Bebo, and I found that seeing Kayla wrestle with a whole kaleidoscope of feeds, devices and platforms made her strong grip on her integrity as a  funny and deeply warm-hearted individual all the more remarkable. Bo Burnham, as with Gerwig, made a pretty incredible film here - in particular you should watch out for the father/daughter dynamic, which is my favourite part. Eighth Grade is funny and generous, and the perfect medicine if you’re feeling demoralised by the state of the world right now.

5. The Breadwinner, dir. Nora Twomey

The Breadwinner is a really lovely animated film telling the story of Parvana, a young girl living with her family under the Taliban. When her father is taken off to prison, Parvana sees no other choice but to dress as a boy to provide for her mother and siblings. But how long will her disguise last? The story here was what really gripped me - it’s very simple, in both the telling and the themes, but it is truly beautiful in that simplicity. The emotions are very raw, and this film goes to some shockingly dark places at times - while I think it can be watched with children as long as they are mature enough for some challenging themes and upsetting moments, it’s likely to speak most strongly to adult audiences with a fuller appreciation for the context in which the film is set. It’s a great and moving alternative to more mainstream animated efforts, and is well worth your time.

6. Phantom Thread, dir. Paul Thomas Anderson

This was a delightfully twisted film with an absorbingly complicated and twisty relationship at its centre. Vicky Krieps is an absolute marvel as Alma, and it’s wonderful to see how she battles to bring the fragile and austere designer  Reynolds Woodcock (Daniel Day-Lewis) to heel. It’s also a beautiful film with rather fabulous fashions - if you love couture, particularly from the ‘50s, this will be a real treat. I also appreciated the many allusions to classic cinema - there are strong shades of Hitchcock’s Rebecca, as well as the underrated David Lean film The Passionate Friends. Check this out if you like your romantic dramas weird and entirely unpredictable.

7. Revenge, dir. Coralie Fargeat

Revenge is angry, sun-soaked and batshit insane - and it is pretty great for all of those reasons. It follows Jennifer, the teenage mistress of a sleazy married man. After a horrifying assault Jennifer returns, phoenix-like, to wreak her revenge upon her attackers. This movie was very much inspired by exploitation flicks, with their penchant for showing scantily clad (and frequently bloody) women wielding shotguns to hunt down the brutes who did them wrong. However, first-time director Coralie Fargeat takes every one of those tropes and owns them, ramping up the blood and giving the action a propulsive energy that keeps you gripped even as you know exactly where things are going. The soundtrack here is also one to look out for - it’s all pulsating synths that do a great job of building the suspense and tension from the get-go.

8. Lean on Pete, dir. Andrew Haigh

This is a very painful film in many ways, but it’s only painful because it does such a great job of earning your emotional investment. The lead of this film is Charley, a sensitive and quiet teenage boy who becomes attached to an ailing race horse as he seeks to escape his troubled home-life. When he finds himself in crisis, Charley takes the horse and they head off on a journey across the American heartland. Charlie Plummer is extraordinary as the lead here - Charley is the kind of character that makes you want to reach through the screen so you can offer him a hug of reassurance and support. The photography of the American countryside is exquisite, and means this film really deserves to be seen on the big screen - the breadth of the landscape gives all of the emotional drama some (richly deserved, in my view) extra punch.

9. You Were Never Really Here, dir. Lynne Ramsay

This is a very weird film (you’re probably noticing a theme at this point) but it’s completely absorbing. It’s very much actor-led, and the film rests on the shoulders of Joaquin Phoenix’s gripping and unpredictable performance - in some scenes he’s muttering in deference to his mother like a modern-day Norman Bates, while in others he’s portrayed almost as a lost boy in an overgrown body, disorientated by his environment and engaging in acts of extreme violence as if in a sort of trance. The narrative is fuzzy and unfocused, but I didn’t find that mattered much since I was too busy following every evolution of Phoenix’s face.

10. Thoroughbreds, dir. Cory Finley

Olivia Cooke and Anya Taylor-Joy make fantastic foils to one another as two appallingly privileged teenagers whose obscene wealth is only matched by their resounding lack of morals. This is a film that plays with your loyalties, trying to wrong-foot you at every turn - it’s frequently difficult to figure out what’s genuine here, and while that did sometimes leave me feeling a bit emotionally detached that’s usually the point. This film is more of an intellectual puzzle than a lean, mean, emotion-extracting machine (see: Lean on Pete), and it succeeds brilliantly on that level. The simplicity of the story means the fun lies in picking apart lines and expressions, so go in prepared for some close viewing.

[gelissaleveille]

Tyler Perry and the Case for Black Mediocrity

     Over the last twenty years, wide-released black cinema has sat within a comfortable plateau. Ask any prospective black filmmaker about their dreams and be patient as they tell you repeatedly how they are asked if they will become the next Tyler Perry. For a long time, I resented such a comparison on the merit of his work which I deemed less than superior. Comparing oneself to Tyler Perry felt like a cop-out, which is pretty short-sighted, especially taking into account the empire that he has amassed around himself in Atlanta. I was (am) tired of the Madea schtick, of the played-out trope of the worn down black woman, and I was tired of thinking that was all black cinema could be. This thought proves how little I know of the vast genre that is Black cinema and how it has occurred in waves like other film genres. My specific gripe was always with Mr. Perry, however, since it was all anyone knew when thinking of “black” and “filmmaker” and his ideas of family, black womanhood, and his irresponsibility in letting those tropes last. This isn’t an analysis on that though. I can get into that at a later time when I’ve seen more of his films and can accurately rate them. What interests me most about Tyler Perry is his formulaic style and what that means on the bigger stage of black mediocrity versus black excellence.  

     Mediocrity is something I’ve thought about consistently for years. I was one of those kids who did really well in school, not good enough to be gifted (thank goodness), but good enough to have a lot of pressure placed on me. I’ve never done well under that sort of pressure and have always caved under it rather than prospered. That pressure petered out as I got older as I maintained a comfortable position as someone smart enough for advanced classes but not hard-working enough to be exceptional. I was mediocre. Now, I’ve come to a place where that is a really comfortable place to be, but growing up it was a major source of the latent anxiety that was always buzzing within myself. To a certain extent, Black people are called to be exceptional. Exceptionality and excellence are used a marker of our worth on many scales and it can easily change the access, social capital, and literal capital that one is able to have if they meet these standards of excellence. This is coupled with the concept of working “twice as hard for half as much” that Black kids in white societies are subjected to. Not only are Black kids expected to work twice as hard but they need to be excellent at everything they do and it creates an unlevel playing field that leaves us at the mercy of our white neighbors. Anyway, none of that is new information nor is it revolutionary. It’s something to be dealt with and challenged, but it might not be in my lifetime. Which is why I make the case for Black mediocrity.

     Black mediocrity exists. It’s always been there. Ask anyone, and though they might be reticent to put their family’s business out there, trust and believe they’re thinking of someone who embodies mediocrity. In all seriousness, it’s just life. If there are millions of Black people, how can we all be excellent? It’s a ploy fed to the greater consciousness that when Black people succeed they are embodying an excellence that separates us from the “others”. What Black people do know is that we are human. We are allowed mistakes and many mistakes that are deemed to be our fault are the results of years of systems that make mistakes the only option. All of this can be applied to the Hollywood Gatekeepers, wherein only the best and brightest of the People of Color can be let in on a limited basis thus furthering the idea in the minds of non-Blacks that we are all good at the things we do. Stop it. Some of us are okay. And that’s okay.  

     Over the past few years, movies have been coming out by Black directors or centering Black people that are each deemed the “most important movie of the year”. It’s been wonderful seeing these movies be made and telling stories that don’t reflect the same faces that have been seen over and over again. But calling certain Black movies excellent simply because they are Black is a shallow attempt at stemming the diversity gap. It tells black filmmakers that unless they can make movies that “wow” people, their films will not be worth anything. Essentially, if they don’t appeal to white people, they’re not appealing at all. That isn’t to say anything bad about Black audiences. They love the movies and they show their support in droves, let that be known. However, it makes some directors believe that to attain a certain level of “excellence” they need to be accepted by certain groups. This manifests by creating content that can not only relate to Black audiences but also somehow manage to entertain non-Black audiences too. It cheapens the work that these filmmakers are able to do because, in order to make white people feel included in the ways that they like, things must be explained to them. As a cause of this explanation, Black audiences aren’t given any revolutionary themes to explore. All this for the accolade of white-empowered institutions.

     This is all to say that I’ve rethought my stance on Tyler Perry films. I still think his work is damaging to the image of Black womanhood and families, but this insistence that his work is deemed “low-art” is snooty and as a child of cinema, I need to be open to all forms of work. I have to allow him his place in the history of Black American cinema and also his work as a playwright, which is where he got his start. Yes, the idea of Black mediocrity is kind of a joke, because I know that we are all mediocre in our own special ways and I love us because of it. But if we, as an audience, are going to use Black excellence as a signifier for a higher class of Black cinema, we owe it to ourselves to be better informed.

[janiedean]

book meme

tagged by @robb-greyjoy and @cafeleningrad thank you both! <3

1. Which book has been on your shelves the longest? Uhm. Uhm. That’s... a hard... question... but I think the collection of Irish fairytales I really was into when I was like seven? I probably have older stuff than that but not on my shelves (it’d be stored somewhere) and not that I re-read at this point.

2. What is your current read, your last read and the book you’ll read next? The current read is Stuart Kaminsky’s The Howard Hughes Affair in the Toby Peters series because I need light reading and twenty-four books of down on his luck PI in Hollywood in the forties always dealing with old hollywood cinema stars is exactly what I need for light reading.

Last read: it was the previous in those series, You Bet Your Life, or if you don’t count that it was some medieval history book.

Next read: I’d like for it to be Stephen and Owen King’s Sleeping Beauties but it’s most likely gonna be either roman history or medieval history, again. Or possibly the fifth in that series but it’s really quick reading so. xD

3. Which book does everyone like and you hated? I’m gonna almost quote Damien who said P&P (which I...uh... don’t like lol) and say Emma which is still the Most Insufferable Thing I Ever Read In My Entire Life. P&P is less insufferable but I don’t get the fascination and mist likely never will.

4. Which book do you keep telling yourself you’ll read, but you probably won’t? Idk I eventually get to everything I mean to but I should have read War and Peace like years ago. ONE DAY. XDD

5. Which book are you saving for “retirement?” None, I save anything longer than 500 pages for when I’m on vacation but who even knows when I’ll get to retirement, so...

6. Last page: read it first or wait till the end? I ALWAYS WAIT UNTIL THE END I NEVER CHECK THE LAST PAGE are we srs it’s the last one for a reason

7. Acknowledgements: waste of ink and paper or interesting aside? Always fundamental. I always read acknowledgments. Though I don’t do the mistakes of reading afterwords before the book because I spoiled myself the ending of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd because I had to read the afterword first and I was an idiot xD

8. Which book character would you switch places with? ... honest? Rob from High Fidelty, not just because we’re sadly almost the same person but because I wanna own a fucking record shop and that’d be about the only way I could do it in this lifetime I fear...

9. Do you have a book that reminds you of something specific in your life (a person, a place, a time)? Hmmm, lots I guess, but Different Seasons was the summer when I turned fifteen and it definitely changed my life for the better and I always remember it fondly, same for The Three Musketeers and the 2006 summer which was.. an interesting time I guess xD, latin/greek epics will forever be tied with my father for better or worse and french authors with my mom aaaand beat generation stuff definitely reminds me of my best friend from high school and I could probably say that while I never read hp it also reminds me of people I was better off without so that’s probably another reason why I hate it but never mind that xDDDDD

10. Name a book you acquired in some interesting way. Hmm idk I’m totally blanking here XD I don’t think I have any *interesting* story about this sorry guys

11. Have you ever given away a book for a special reason to a special person? lmao no. The three times I lent book to someone they never came back and I’m really not the kind of person who shares their *special* copies so it’d have to be a really special person to make me give away a book I already own for special reasons xD and I haven’t met that person yet

12. Which book has been with you to the most places? I have a feeling it’d be the second dark tower book or the third for how badly I ruined them

13. Any “required reading” you hated in high school that wasn’t so bad ten years later? If I actually found the inner strength to get over my issues with some teacher and re-read I promessi sposi without bias I probably wouldn’t find it as terrible as I did back in the day but it’ll take me another ten years for that I fear, for the rest I’m fairly good with everything I had to read as a requirement.

14. What is the strangest item you’ve ever found in a book? Someone’s phone number I fear

15. Used or brand new? Don’t care either way but if I have to buy, used because they’re cheaper tbh xDDDD

16. Stephen King: Literary genius or opiate of the masses? Guys. Guys. While I’m the first person who wouldn’t say King is the new Proust, and while there’s a lot of things I dislike about the way he does things (first of all how much he loves his PEOPLE FORGETTING EVERYTHING trope)....

a) when I read Different Seasons I was in a moment where I had fallen out of love with reading stuff for reasons and it brought it back full spades; b) he was the first author I read in english and 90% the person that influenced my writing style more for those reasons; c) he’s a genius at crafting characters/character work/character development way more than a lot of people critics enjoy more than him and since I’m a character driven whore put two and two together; d) he came up with my Favorite Fictional Character Ever (whose surname is half of my tumblr nickname/internet nickname anywhere so...) and with my Favorite Ship Ever and my Favorite Series Ever and a lot of my Favorite Things Ever; e) he’s exceedingly good at his genre and while his endings are shit 70% of the time when he nails it he nails it;

tldr: he might not be the Greatest Writer Ever but he’s my Subjectively Favorite Writer Ever for bad and for good and no one disrespects king in front of me okay? k. I owe his damned books enough to repay how much they made me suffer xD 

17. Have you ever seen a movie you liked better than the book? Blade Runner is vastly better than the book and Maurice is pretty much as good as it but there were changes that imo were improvements over things that were not in the plot so I guess it counts.

18. Conversely, which book should NEVER have been introduced to celluloid? 

...........

THE

DARK

TOWER

I rest my case no one wants me to start ranting again about how much that piece of shit movie should have never existed and idris elba deserved a lot better than ending up involved in it.

19. Have you ever read a book that’s made you hungry, cookbooks being excluded from this question? no but I wrote a bakery au that made people feel hungry, does that count?

20. Who is the person whose book advice you’ll always take? my parents though I’ll take it with a pinch of salt because there’s people they like that I can’t stand (*cough* borges *cough* SORRY I KNOW) and viceversa but let’s say that if my dad said he didn’t dislike it then it’s probably not a bad book in 90% of the cases same for my mom (though she didn’t hate the solitude of prime numbers as much as I did which is why as stated I take things with a pinch of salt xD), then @robb-greyjoy because we basically like the same things so I trust his judgment, my high school bf who’s not on tumblr (the beat generation person) who also had my same tastes so I’d have definitely trusted her, and there’s a few tumblr users I follow for books talking whose judgment I trust 99% of the time xD

also half of the people I wanted to tag got tagged by either of you so hmmm @lordhellebore @slushiebear @blueagia @incblackbird @julesdrenages @julesfelden @ms-mormont and @greyjoysea? if you all want to of course otherwise ignore me xD

[weekendwarriorblog]

The Weekend Warrior Home and Drive-In Edition July 24, 2020: THE RENTAL, MOST WANTED, YES GOD YES, AMULET, RETALIATION and more

Are we all having fun yet? Does the fun ever truly begin when you’re in the middle of a pandemic, and no one can seem to figure out how to get out of it? While I love New York’s Governor Cuomo and the amazing job he did getting us through the worst of it, he just doesn’t seem to know how to get movie theaters reopened, nor does he seem to care. I mean, they’ve had four months now to figure this out and New York City is already in Phase 4 (which was supposed to be the last phase of the reopening).  It’s a real shame, because this has been a ridiculously hot summer and with none of the “cooling centers” from past summers being possible, it is brutal out there. Fortunately, there are a few decent movies this week to watch at home and some in the drive-ins that are popping up all over the country.

I gotta say that I’m particularly bummed that my favorite local theater, the Metrograph, won’t be opening any time soon, but starting Friday, they’ll be starting “Metrograph Live Screenings,” which will consist of the type of amazing programming the theater has gained a reputation for since opening four years ago. They are offering new “digital memberships” at $5 a month or $50 annually (about half the price of a normal membership) so that you can watch any of the movies being offered at home. The program begins on Friday with Claire Denis’ 2004 film, L’Intrus, which Metrograph Pictures picked up for release. That’s followed on Monday with St. Claire Bourne’s doc, Paul Robeson: Here I Stand.  You can see the full list of screening times and dates (many with filmmaker introductions) on the Official Site, and this will be a good time for those who can’t get downtown to the coolest area in New York City to check out the Metrograph programming until they reopen. (Apparently, they’re working on a drive-in to open sometime in August. Wish I had a car.)

If nothing else, it’s safe to say that IFC is killing it this summer. The indie distributor stepped right up to the pandemic and said, “Hey, we’ll play in those drive-in theaters that have mostly been ignored and didn’t play our films for decades!” It has led to at least two big hits in the past few months.

This week, IFC releases the horror/thriller THE RENTAL (IFC Films), the directorial debut by Dave Franco.  In it, brothers Charlie (Dan Stevens) and Josh (Jeremy Allen White) decide to take a weekend away with their significant others, Charlie’s wife Michelle (Allison Brie) and Josh’s girlfriend Mina (Sheila Vand), who also happens to be Charlie’s creative work partner. They have found a remote house to rent, but they’re immediately suspicious of the caretaker (Toby Huss), who they think may be spying on them. He’s also racist towards Mina’s Arab lineage.

The premise seems fairly simple and actually quite high concept, and there have been quite a few thrillers that played with the premise of a creepy landlord/caretaker, including last year’s The Intruder, directed by Deon Taylor, and a lesser known thriller called The Resident, starring Hillary Swank and Jeffrey Dean Morgan. Part of what makes The Rental different is that Franco co-wrote it with Joe Swanberg, so you know it’s going to be more of a character-based thriller than some kind of gorefest. Sure enough, this deals with the competitive nature between the brothers and the jealousy that arises when you have such a close working relationship with your brother’s girlfriend. It’s what happens between these two couples over the course of this vacation that makes you even more interested in their behavior after things start happening to them, but there’s a pretty major twist that happens just when you think you know where things may be going.

That’s all I really should say about the plot to avoid spoilers. Although the third act veers into the darker horror tropes we may have seen before, that’s also when it starts to get quite insane. Franco clearly shows he has the eye for the type of suspense and timing necessary for an effective thriller, and his cast, including wife Alison Brie, really deliver on all aspects of his script to deliver shocking moments that will keep you invested.

In some ways, The Rental might be the most obviously accessible movie of the weekend, and since it will be playing in drive-ins (and maybe a few still-open theaters?), it probably is worth seeing that way i.e. with others, although it will also be available via digital download, of course.

Another “Featured Flick” this week -- and I’m guessing this is one you won’t be reading about anywhere else --  is Daniel Roby’s MOST WANTED (Saban FIlms), a real-life crime-thriller starring Josh Hartnett as Globe and Mail journalist, Victor Malarek, who discovered that a French-Canadian junkie named Daniel Léger (Antoine-Olivier Pilon) had been sentenced to 100 years in a Thailand prison for drug trafficking in 1989.  As Daniel attempts to survive the violent conditions of the Thai jail, Victor tries to uncover the crooked practices by the Canadian federal police to get Daniel imprisoned for their own means.

This is one of two Saban Films releases that really surprised me, maybe because I’ve gotten so used to them releasing so much action and genre schlock meant mainly for VOD, usually starring fairly big-name action stars from the past, usually not doing their best work. Most Wanted is a far more serious crime-drama that tells an absolutely amazing story from North America’s famed war on drugs from the ‘80s. First, we meet Antoine-Olivier Pilon’s Daniel, a lowlife junkie who is trying to find a place to live and a job, something he finds when he gets into business with Jim Gaffigan’s Glenn Picker, a complete low-life in every sense of the word. It’s funny, because when Gaffigan’s character is introduced, you’re immediately reminded of the famous “Sister Christian” in PT Anderson’s Boogie Nights, and as we watch Picker completely humiliate and then betray Daniel, you realize that we might be seeing one of Gaffigan’s best performances to date.

What keeps Most Wanted interesting is that it tells the story on a number of concurrent storylines, ignoring the fact that one of the threads might be taking place years before the other. Through this method, we see how Daniel begins working with Glenn, while also seeing Victor’s investigation, as well as the sting operation being perpetrated by the Canadian feds, as represented by the always great Stephen McHattie. (McHattie’s appearance is also a telltale sign that this is indeed a Canadian production, as is the role played by author and filmmaker Don McKellar.)  I’ve always feltHarnett was a really underrated actor especially as he got into his 30s and started doing more mature roles, and while his reporter character may not always be the central focus of the story, his attempt to get his editor to respect his work is something far too familiar to far too many writers. One also can’t sleep on the fantastic performance by Antoine-Olivier Pilon, who really holds the film together by starting out as a scumbag almost as bad as Picker but through his troubles to survive in Thai jail, we start to become really invested in his story. (The only character who doesn’t get nearly as fulfilling a story arc is Amanda Crew as Victor’s wife Anna who gives birth just as he gets involved in this major story.)

I wasn’t at all familiar with Daniel Roby’s previous work but the way he broke this story down in a way that keeps it interesting, regardless of which story you’re following, makes Most Wanted as good or better than similar films by far more experienced and respected filmmakers. (For some reason, it made me think of both The Departed and Black Mass, both movies about Whitey Bulger, although Daniel’s story is obviously very different.)

Okay, let’s get into a trio of religious-tinged offerings…

Natalia Dyer from Stranger Things stars in YES, GOD, YES (Vertical Entertainment), the semi-autobiographical directorial debut by Obvious Child co-writer Karen Maine (expanded from an earlier short), which will open via virtual cinemas this Friday as well as at a few drive-ins, and then it will be available via VOD and digital download on Tuesday, July 28. The coming-of-age comedy debuted at last year’s SXSW Film Festival and won a Special Jury Prize for its ensemble cast. Dyer plays sixteen-year-old Alice, a good Midwestern Catholic teenager, who has a sexual awakening after a racy AOL chat. Wracked by guilt, Alice attends a religious retreat camp where the cute football player (Wolfgang Novogratz) catches her eye, but she constantly feels pressure to quell her masturbatory urges.

I’m not sure I really knew what to expect from Ms. Maine’s feature film debut as a director. I certainly didn’t expect to enjoy this movie as much as I did, nor did I think I would relate to Dyer’s character as much as I did --  I’ve never been a teen girl, nor have I ever been Catholic, and by the early ‘00s, I was probably closer to the age that Maine is now versus being a teenager discovering her sexuality. In fact, I probably was expecting something closer to the Mandy Moore comedy Saved!, which was definitely more about religion than one character’s sexual journey.

Either way, I went into Yes, God, Yes already realizing what a huge fan I am of coming-of-age stories, and while there were certainly that seemed familiar to other films, such as Alice’s inadvertent AIM with an online pervert early in the film. Even so, Maine did enough with the character of Alice to keep it feeling original with the humor being subdued while definitely more on the R-rated side of things. On top of that, Dyer was quite brilliant in the role, just a real break-through in a similar way as Kaitlyn Dever in Book Smart last year. (Granted, I’m so behind on Stranger Things, I don’t think I’ve even gotten to Dyer’s season.) The only other familiar face is Timothy Simons from Veep as the super-judgmental (and kinda pervy) priest who Alice has to turn to when confessing her sins. (A big part of the story involves a rumor started about Alice and a sex act she committed on a fellow student that keeps coming up.)

Yes, God, Yes proves to be quite a striking dramedy that I hope more people will check out. I worry that because this may have been covered out of last year’s SXSW, it might not get the new and updated attention it deserves. Certainly, I was pleasantly surprised with what Maine and Dyer did with a genre that still has a lot to tell us about growing up and discovering oneself. (You can find out where you can rent the movie digitally over on the Official Site.)

Another horror movie that premiered at this year’s Sundance is AMULET (Magnet), the directorial debut by British actor Romola Garai, who also wrote the screenplay. It stars Romanian actor Alec Secareanu as Tomaz, a former soldier who is offered a place to stay in a dilapidated house in London with a young woman named Magda (Carla Juri from Blade Runner 2049) and her ill and dying mother. As Tomaz starts to fall for Magda, he discovers there are sinister forces afoot in the house with Magda’s mother upstairs being at their core.

I was kind of interested in this one, not just because it being Garai’s first feature as a filmmaker but also just because Sundance has such a strong pedigree for midnight movies, probably culminating in the premiere of Ari Aster’s Hereditary there a few years back. It feels like ever since then, there are many movies trying to follow in that movie’s footsteps, and while this was a very different movie from the recent Relic, it had its own set of issues.

The main issue with Amulet is that it deliberately sets itself up with a confusing narrative where we see Tomaz in the present day and in the past concurrently, so it’s very likely you won’t know what you’re watching for a good 20 minutes or so. Once Tomaz gets to the house, escorted there by a nun played by Imelda Staunton (Vera Drake), the movie settles down into a grueling pace as the main two characters get to know each other and Tomaz explores the incongruities of the decaying house.

Honestly, I’m already pretty burnt out on the religious horror movies between The Lodge and the still-unreleased Saint Maud, and the first inclination we get of any of the true horror to come is when Tomaz discovers some sort of mutated bat-like creature in the toilet, and things get even more disturbing from there. Although I won’t go into too many details about what happens, the movie suffers from some of the same issues as Relic where it’s often too dark to tell exactly what is happening. As it goes along, things just get weirder and weirder right up until a “what the fuck” moment that could have come from the mind of David Lynch.

I don’t want to completely disregard Garai’s fine work as a filmmaker since she’s made a mostly compelling and original horror movie – I have a feeling some might love this -- but the grueling pace and confusing narrative turns don’t really do justice to what might have been a chilling offering otherwise.

Going by the title and the fact it’s being released by Saban Films, I presumed that Ludwig and Paul Shammasian’s RETALIATION (Saban Films/Lionsgate) was gonna be a violent and gritty crime revenge thriller, but nothing could be further from the truth. Adapted by Geoff Thompson from his 2008 short film “Romans 12:20,” it stars Orlando Bloom as Malcolm, a troubled ex-con doing demolition work while fighting against his demons when he spots someone in the pub from his past that caused a severe childhood trauma.

This is another movie that I really didn’t know what to expect, even as it began and we followed Bloom’s character over the course of a day, clearly a very troubled man who has been dealing with many personal demons. Make no mistake that this is a tough movie, and it’s not necessarily a violent genre movie, as much as it deals with some heavy HEAVY emotions in a very raw way.

Honestly, I could see Geoff Thompson’s screenplay easily being performed on stage, but the way the Shammasian Brothers have allowed Malcolm’s story to slowly build as we learn more and more about his past makes the film so compelling, but they also let their actors really shine with some of the stunning monologues with which they’re blessed. While this is clearly a fantastic and possibly career-best performance by Bloom, there are also good performances by Janet Montgomery, as the woman who loves Malcolm but just can’t handle his mood changes. Also good is Charlie Creed-Miles, as the young priest who tries to help Malcolm.

I can easily see this film not being for everybody, because some of the things the film deals with, including pedophile priests and the effects their actions have on the poor, young souls who put their faith in them, they’re just not things people necessarily may want to deal with. Make no mistake that Retaliation is an intense character drama that has a few pacing issues but ultimately hits the viewer right in the gut.

A movie I had been looking forward to quite some time is the Marie Currie biopic, RADIOACTIVE (Amazon Prime), directed by Marjane Satrapi (Persepolis) and starring the wondrous Rosamund Pike as the famed scientist who helped discover radiation. Based on Lauren Redniss’ book, this is the type of Working Title biopic that would normally premiere in the Fall at the Toronto Film Festival, and sure enough, this one did. The fact it wasn’t released last year makes one think maybe this didn’t fare as well as potential awards fodder as the filmmakers hoped. It’s also the type of movie that works too hard to cater to the feminist resurgence from recent years, which ultimately ends up being its undoing.

The problem with telling Marie Currie’s story is that there’s so much to tell and Redniss’ book as adapted by Jack Thorne just tries to fit too much into every moment as years pass in mere minutes. There’s so much of Marie’s life that just isn’t very interesting, but trying to include all of it just takes away from the scenes that do anything significant. Maybe it’s no surprise that Thorne also wrote The Aeronauts, Amazon’s 2019 ballooning biopic that failed to soar despite having Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones as its leads.

I’m a similarly huge Rosamund Pike fan, so I was looking forward to her shining in this role, but she does very little to make Marie Currie someone you might want to follow, as she’s so headstrong and stubborn. This is the most apparent when she meets Pierre Currie, as played by Sam Riley, and maybe you don’t blame her for being cynical, having had much of her work either discredited or stolen by men in the past. Shockingly, Pike’s performance seems all over the place, sometimes quite moving but other times being overly emotive. Almost 90 minutes into the movie, Anya Taylor-Joy turns up as Curie’s grown daughter, and it’s one of the film’s biggest infraction, wasting such great talent in such a nothing role.

While Radioactive could have been a decent vehicle for Ms. Satrapi to flex her muscles as a filmmaker, the movie spends so much time having Currie fighting against the male-dominated science field that it loses sight of why she was such an important figure in the first place. Radioactive just comes across as a generally bland and unimaginative by-the-books biopic.

Also on Digital and On Demand this Friday is Chris Foggin’s FISHERMAN’S FRIENDS (Samuel Goldwyn Films), another quaint British comedy based on a true story, much like the recent Military Wives. Rather than being about a group of singing women, this one is about a group of singing men! What a twist!

Daniel Mays plays Danny, a music biz exec from London who travels to the seaside town of Port Isaac, Cornwall with some of his record company coworkers. Once there, they discover a local group of singing local fisherman, known as “Fisherman’s Friends,” who Danny wants to sign to a label. He also wants to get closer to Tuppence Middleton’s single mother Alwyn, who, no surprise, is also the only pleasant-looking younger woman in the town.

Fisherman’s Friends isn’t bad, but if you’ve seen a lot of British movies from the last few decades, then you’ve already seen this movie, particularly the “fish out of water” humor of a guy from the big city trying to relate to the down-to-earth ways of folk in a fishing village. It’s the type of really forced humor that is perfectly pleasant but not particularly groundbreaking in this day and age with so many filmmakers trying to do cutting-edge work.

Instead, this goes for a very typical and cutesie formula where everything works out with very little real conflict even when it throws in a needless subplot about the local pub falling on hard times and selling to a rich man who has little regard for the ways o the town.  On top of that, and even if this wasn’t based on a true story, it’s very hard to believe anyone in the music industry or who buys records would be that interested in this group to make them worth signing a million-pound record deal. (Apparently, this really happened!)

I think it’s adorable that filmmakers are trying to turn character actor Daniel Mays (who you’ve seen in everything!) into a romantic lead, especially when you have James Purefoy right there! Instead, 56-year-old Purefoy is instead cast as Middleton’s father, while she’s put into a situation where she’s the love interest for a man that’s 23 years her elder. This kind of thing rarely bothers me as it does many younger female critics, but their romance is just ridiculous and unnecessary if not for the formula. As much as I enjoyed seeing Dave Johns from I, Daniel Blake as one of the singing fishermen, there really isn’t much for him to do in this.

If you like sea shanties and you are a woman over 60 (or have a mother that age) then Fisherman’s Friends is a cute butnever particularly hilarious British comedy that tries to be The Full Monty. But it never really tries to be anything more or less than the formula created by that movie 23 years ago, so it’s quickly forgotten after its saccharine finale.

Unfortunately, I just wasn’t able to get THE ROOM (Shudder/RLJE Films), the live action directing debut from Christin Volckman (Renaissance), but it’s now available on VOD, Digital HD, DVD AND Blu-Ray! It stars Olga Kurylenko and Kevin Janssens as a couple who leave the city to move into a an old house where they discover a secret hidden room that has the power to materialize anything they want, but this is a horror film, so what might seem like a fairy tale is likely to get dark. (I actually think I saw the trailer for this on Shudder, so I’ll probably check it out, and if it’s worth doing so, I’ll mention it in next week’s column.)

Yet another horror movie hitting On Demand this Friday is Pamela Moriarty’s A DEADLY LEGEND (Gravitas Ventures) that stars Corbin Bensen as a real estate developer who buys an old summer camp to build new homes unaware of the dark history of supernatural worship and human sacrifice. I’m gonna take the fifth on this one, which also stars Judd Hirsch and Lori Petty.

Available via Virtual Cinema through New York’s Film Forum and L.A.’s Laemmle is Gero von Boehm’s documentary, Helmut Newton: The Bad and the Beautiful (Kino Lorber), about the photographer who had a nearly five-decade career before dying in a car crash in 2006.

From Colombia to various Virtual Cinemas is Catalina Arroyave’s debut, Days of the Whale (Outsider Pictures) set in the city of Medellin, where it follows two young graffiti artists, Cristina and Simon, who tag places around where they live but coming from very different backgrounds, but they eventually bond while part of a revolutionary art collective.

Danny Pudi from Community and Emily C. Chang from The Vampire Diaries star in Sam Friedlander’s comedy Babysplitters (Gravitas Ventures) as one of two couples who have mixed emotions about having kids, so they decided to share one baby between them. Okay, then.

Netflix will also debut the rom-com sequel, The Kissing Booth 2, once again starring Joey King as Ellie, who is trying to juggle her long-distance romance with Jacob Erlodi’s Noah and her close friendship with Joel Courtney’s Lee.  I haven’t seen the first movie. Probably won’t watch this one.

Next week, more movies in a variety of theatrical and non-theatrical release!

If you’ve read this week’s column and have bothered to read this far down, feel free to drop me some thoughts at Edward dot Douglas at Gmail dot Com, or tweet me on Twitter. I love hearing from my “readers,” whomever they may be.’

[polis-fandom]

The Last Jedi thoughts

It’s been a week and I’m still on the fence with this movie. Everytime I think I’m getting over the disappointment and starting to enjoy what was good there, I come across some review that’s like “THIS IS THE GREATEST STAR WARS MOVIE EVERRRR!!! ABSOLUTELY BREATHTAKING!” and it flares up again. I feel like I’m in the Gombrowicz’s tale, “how is it breathtaking, when it’s not breathtaking?! how is it beautiful, when it’s not beautiful? how is Rian Johnson a great director, when he’s the worst one since George Lucas?”. I need to get away from any discourse about this movie, or I’ll end up hating it. And it doesn’t deserve my hatred, because it’s not really a bad movie.

Bitter Me: *whispers* Luke Skywalker.

Me:

So I’ll just put my feelings here and move on. Under the cut, ‘cause lots of spoilers and overhelming bitterness, tho nothing new, others said all that already, so ignore as you wish.

“Star Wars: A New Hope” was the first movie I watched in cinema. No, I mean the remastered version from 1997, I’m not that old. But, yeah, Star Wars were the movies of my childhood, and are still among my favourite stories ever. After surviving the rocky Prequel Trilogy during my teenage years, I was excited to be brought back to the universe, and while The Force Awakens was redundant as far as the storyline goes, it won me over with the visuals. I made a conscious decision not to get attached to any of the new characters, because I felt there wasn’t enough to know about them. Besides, in the past Luke Skywalker didn’t became my favourite character until the second movie, so I figured I had the time to fall in love with them until I saw more.

Nice Me: Look at this one, he’s played by your favourite actor.

Bitter Me: That one is garbage.

Bitter Me: I’ll just wait to see the whole story. Maybe others will do something extra.

Nice Me: Like what? Blow up the Starkiller Base? Risk their life to save friends? Talk to Darth Vader’s helmet?

Bitter Me: Lose a limb.

(Btw, did you notice the advancement of the medical treatment in Last Jedi? The guy gets slashed through the back and wakes up mere days later just fine, other barely gets a scar…

Bitter Me: at least they are consistent with that.)

So, going in to see the Last Jedi, I had open mind, no expectations for the story, because Star Wars - aka the series that always makes it to the top of the lists of biggest plot twists ever - and I knew nothing besides what was shown in the trailer. And yet, I made one mistake. I saw someone’s tweet about how it’s the best Star Wars movie since the Empire…

Bitter Me: …and then I spent first hour trying to understand, where did this guy saw that greatness, because it just wasn’t there.

I’ve got the biggest gripes with the editing, cinematography, and directing in general. You see, this series, however bad the movies were, they at least were visually stunning. They had certain style and flow - despite all the action, there were always slower scenes, a bit more nostalgic, giving you time to soak up the visuals and feel the emotion. Johnson fails at that repeatedly. The edit at the beging is very rushed, the scenes chopped, and set-up of some could’ve been better. Even Ahch-too, which was amazingly shot in previous film, here becomes a more of clustered and claustrophobic set.

Nice Me: But there are some magnificient shots. The admiral Holdo launching into hyperspace - absolutely beautiful. The pretorian guards fight - one of the best lightsabers fights. The Crait scenes with crystals and everything.  

Bitter Me: which just angers me more, because if he’s capable of pulling of shots like that, why the whole movie isn’t equally beautiful???

Nice Me: But the Leia in vacuum scene starts beautiful too. I’m ecstatic that we finally have an undisputed proof that Leia is not only force sensitive, but she actually mastered the use of it. It would have been really interesting to see more of her in the next movie, might she have become a teacher Rey needs...

Nice Me:…but then the latter half of that scene is shot in such a way, it comes of as silly and utterly dumb. The guy is just bad at showing visions.

Nice Me: Breath. Just breath.

Bitter Me: …that one was horribly edited.

Nice Me: But the scene at dark place at AhchToo was impressive…

Bitter Me: …as a trick shot with no substance that leads to nowhere. He could have used some of that creative visuals for the Force Skype scenes, they were edited in such bland manner…

Nice Me: …you’re complaining about that because it reminded you of Alina and Darkling having identical force bond in Grisha, down to the shirtless scene…

Bitter Me:… as bad as that was, Bardugo at least gave a good explanation of how it was possible.

Nice Me: Snoke did it.

Bitter Me: I recognize the narrative need to create such connection between them, I just think it could have been done in a more artistic way visually.

Bitter Me: Rian is praised for the daring and innovative writing of this movie. And yet the main plot can be summed as: they are evacuating the rebel resistance base, escape - but not far, cause they can’t enter hyperspace, so they sneak into evil ship and try to turn off tracking beam, and then seek hidding on a nearby planet. Yep, I’ve never seen a star wars movie with a plot like that.

Bitter Me: So what’s so daring here? destroying all the symbols of the star wars franchise? Making Luke grumpy and acting against his very core?

Bitter Me: Look, I’m not so much against making Luke a space hobo hermit, who no longer wants to train Jedi, it‘s possible to have such turn after you tried and failed. But I have everything against Luke trying to murder Ben, because he’s too powerful and tempted to the dark side. Luke did everything he could to save his father, who was far deeper on the Dark side. Luke was himself tempted by it, and resisted it. Luke would have done everything to save Ben, but he would not draw a lightsaber on him…

Nice Me: But he says it was a flitting feeling, just a moment of weakness, he regrets deeply…

Bitter Me: What exactly young Ben Solo had done to lead Luke to even consider such an act? We are only told the dark side was rising in him, and that’s sounds vague as hell.

Look, The Star Wars at it’s core were a story about hope - that there’s good even in a bad person, about redemption, and unwavering familial love. Luke was the embodiment of that, and that scene goes directly against it.

If he so insist on having such a drastic turn for Luke, he should’ve made us understand, how did it happen. We should’ve seen more of young Ben Solo, and their dynamic prior to the break. It would serve both their characters and story overall better than this cheap shot for the shock value, so we, like Rey, would cry: You have created Kylo Ren???

But, honestly, if Rian is oh-so-clever and daring writer, he could’ve come up with a better, more complex backstory for Luke and Ben’s breakdown.

Bitter Me: and besides Luke’s arc here? The big lesson he learns? „the real great master let’s his students grow beyond him.” That’s such a simple one, so obvious, it’s dumb and annoying, not worthy to be Luke’s final arc. He was wiser than that. Luke was never about being great and powerful, he rejected offers to became such through dark side, he left his jedi training because his friends were more important to him. Why would he be afraid of his student becoming more powerful than him?

Nice Me: But Luke is great. Like when he says „what do you expect me to do? show up and wave my lightsaber, and they will all run off scared?”, he might be mocking the heroic ways and everyone’s expectations, but if you look back, he achieved his biggest win in the Original Trilogy by tossing asside the lightsaber and refusing to fight.

Bitter Me: …and then he goes and does excatly, what he mocked: shows up, wave the lightsaber and scare off the pesky First Order.

Nice Me: And it was EPIC! And the shoulder brush! hilarious!

Bitter Me: yeah, yeah. Btw, was that their first meeting since Luke tried to murder Ben? so he just like that, shows up, mocks Kylo’s powerlessness, fights him and then promises to forceghost hunt him for eternity?

Nice Me: What do you want him to do?

Bitter Me: …I don’t know, APOLOGIZE for trying to murder him?

Nice Me: fine, but this is still about redemption and love and hope. Rose says: That’s how we’re gonna win. Not fighting what we hate, saving what we love. It’s a great quote.

Bitter Me: Then who is saving Kylo? whose there left to love him? Rey, walking off on him, closing door on him? Leia, giving up on him, saying we need to kill him? What mother would say something like that? Leia would say something like that? The princess who was always compassionate, and hugging everyone around? Who spent all the previous film insisting on bringing Ben back?

Nice Me: She says it in a tone that suggests she’s not believing it herself. like she’s trying to convince herself, because others expect that of her, because he’s a threat to them all. And Luke counters it immedietly.

Bitter Me: …It’s still there.

Nice Me: …and there’s still third movie. The story is in progress.

Nice Me: At least Snoke is dead. That was GREAT. He always felt like this unnecessary ouside evil force, that people can conveniently blame for all the bad things done, just kill him and everythings gonna be bright and shiny again. By removing him so early, they made way and time to explore more complex evil inside us, err, characters, or harder to spot like the riches benefiting from the ongoing war. That’s a nice storytelling turn.

Nice Me: And Rey as a random nobody is a joy for my heart, because I’m a bit done with Chosen One trope, where hero’s been destinated for heroics on the qualms of being born a prince or noble or someone powerful. I’ve had hard times connecting with such characters, because I myself never felt born special.

(Bitter Me: Then how did you end up liking Luke, the very icon of Chosen One trope?

Nice Me: Loss of the limb.)

Bitter Me: okay, but that was only told to us, just like Rey’s vision of Kylo’s future. Told, not shown. I mean, given how bad Rian is at visions, it would be cringey, but still it’s a movie, use the visuals to convey the information. Not everything needs to be telegraphed, did we really need that guy liking the rocks on Crait to know it’s salt? Who cares it’s salt? That was distracting.

Nice Me: …that was to bring the attention to the footprint…

Bitter Me: …the big zoom on it did that just fine. The joke was unnecesary.

Bitter Me: Actually half the jokes were unnecessary. The humour was crude, often misplaced and under cutting the drama of the scenes. They say it was needed to balance out the dark themes this movie deals with, but in my opinion the previous movies dealt with the same dark drama, and yet used humour in a less forced nor cynical way. Some say it felt more like a Marvel movie, and true, that’s how it felt.

Nice Me:…but you loved Thor Ragnarok - for it’s humour exactly.

Bitter Me: one, Thor used humour with better placement and sense of purpose, didn’t try to undercut the emotional impact of the scenes with it. Two, it was a Marvel movie - you expect such humour, because that’s their style. Going to the Star Wars you expect Star Wars - great visuals, action scenes, emotions, feelings, not disgusting alien cow. It’s anti-climatic.

Besides, why are we so ashemed of pure emotions and drama, that we need to undercut it with gags and jokes? why there must be a wink, „yeah, we did this serious scene, but we’re not sure we got it good enough, people might mock us for it, better mock ourselves first.” For gods sake, dare to be honest. If it’s serious, heroic, epic, let it be such!

Nice Me: The latter half of the movie was great, tho. Rey using force in non-combat way to move rocks and save friends, nice way to turn joke around into something beautiful. All of them coming together on Millenium Falcon board. Luke’s death with the suns setting, making nice parallel to the sunset at Tatooine long ago at the begining of his journey. That last scene about the power of storytelling, I cried a little, it was so moving…

Bitter Me: … the storytelling about what? Self-righteous jedi deciding who is worthy of forgivness or chance for redemption, and who to finish off while they’re still a kid and asleep? About mothers giving up on their sons? About destroying everything that once was sacred, stripping it of the value? It’s all clever writting, but without understanding the soul of the Star Wars, without keeping it’s core sacred, it came of shallow.

Nice Me: shhh, calm down. It’s just a movie.

Bitter Me: How did we come to the Star Wars being just a movie? just a story? quite ironic, in the context of that ending scene.

Magic is gone.

Nice Me: Come on, Let’s watch it again, maybe you’ll like it better. There’s a cute orange murderball...

Bitter Me: …and my fave actor gets trashed around. Fine, let’s watch it again.

[ahouseoflies]

The Best Films of 2019, Part I

On one hand, I fear the direction of American cinema, and I feel more personally distracted from great art with each passing day. On the other hand, my viewing was up 5% from last year despite my belief that I’ve gotten choosier. I even approve of most of the films nominated for Best Picture. Are the offerings just top-heavy this year? Are my standards declining? Answering questions like those is part of why I present a paragraph or two on everything I see each year, though I can’t even imagine someone sitting down and reading all of this.

Full disclosure: I haven’t seen Just Mercy, Monos, Portrait of a Lady on Fire, Good Boys, Frankie, For Sama, or An Elephant Sitting Still. The tiers, as always, are Garbage, Admirable Failures, Endearing Curiosities with Big Flaws, Pretty Good Movies, Good Movies, Great Movies, and Instant Classics. GARBAGE

129. Cold Pursuit (Hans Petter Moland)- A film professor of mine showed us Wings of Desire and City of Angels, its American remake, in order to show us how a film can technically cover a story while losing the essence that made it special. I can only hope that Hans Petter Moland's Norwegian original is better than his stab at an English language remake, which fails completely at balancing violence and comedy. The movie almost announces its own boredom with the protagonist as it shifts focus first to the villain and then to cops on the case, all of whom have artificial quirks to try to give them life where there isn't any. The Neeson character's journey toward revenge is empty, so the film drifts from him, but it doesn't have anything to say with the other characters either. 128. Domino (Brian De Palma)- Seeking revenge, a Libyan informant roughs up a potential terrorist by throwing him over a restaurant bar. Cut to two cops driving wordlessly. Cut to the Libyan guy dunking the other guy's head in boiling soup. That interruption spells out what the rest of the film does: De Palma could not be less interested in his replacement-level actor's shoddy policework, especially in the self-parody of the last twenty minutes. Any intensity the movie has comes from terrorists (or Guy Pearce over-salting a salad), and then the police drain the momentum. Just make a movie about terrorists, Brian! And, as I've urged you for years, get rid of Pino Donaggio. 127. Beach Bum (Harmony Korine)- Moondog, the spacey, Floridian hedonist poet at the center of the film, is supposed to be "brilliant" and "a good guy" at heart according to his daughter. But at the daughter's wedding, he shakes the hand of her fiance, whom he usually calls "limp-dick," and he says, "What's your name again?" The line got a laugh in my theater, but is it likely that he didn't know the name of his daughter's fiance? Especially if he's a good guy who doesn't hurt people on purpose? It's one example out of a thousand of Harmony Korine making the goofy decision instead of the one that would benefit character or story. I thought that Korine had taken a turn for the lucid with Spring Breakers, but he just isn't interested in making anything consistent enough for me. There's an hour of consequence-free episodes to follow, though I did cherish Jonah Hill's three improvised scenes, for which he tries a sort of Tennessee Williams voice. You can admire how audacious some of the choices are--describing Zac Efron wearing Jncos makes the film sound more fun than it is--but looking at the poster gives you about 70% of what you would get out of the long ninety-five minutes. Yes, McConaughey's shoes are funny, but what else have you got? 126. Fyre Fraud (Jenner Furst, Julia Willoughby Nelson)- Half as good as the Netflix one. Please, by all means, explain to me what a millenial is again. 125. The Kitchen (Andrea Berloff)- One of my mentors stressed that Shakespeare worked in "cultural touchstones," truisms that weren't difficult to prove but served as a sandbox for all of the juicy stuff. So we all know that, say, too much ambition is a bad thing, but having that North Star at all times allows Shakespeare to ply his trade with character development and imagery and symbol. I know that The Kitchen isn't funny or cool or original, but it also doesn't really have an emotional or thematic core. It's a movie with neither the window dressing nor the window. I don't know what I'm getting at, but I watched the last five minutes twice to make sure that it actually was as anti-climactic and inert as I thought.

124. Climax (Gaspar Noe)- Ah, to be a provocateur who has made his best work already and took all of the wrong lessons from it. I don't envy Noe, who insists on formal rigor even when it adds nothing, who goes to greater, more desperate lengths to shock. A third of this film, embedded somewhere between the three openings, is gross young people talking, lewdly and clinically, about whom they want to bone. I thought I started watching French art movies to get away from locker rooms. 123. The Best of Enemies (Robin Bissell)- The supporting cast of Anne Heche, Wes Bentley, and John Gallagher Jr. avail themselves better than the finger-wagging, scenery-chewing leads, but that hardly matters in a movie this fundamentally broken. Apparently no one saw the problem with making a Ku Klux Klan president the dynamic hero of a school integration that he fought against, but that's how the story functions. He's the guy who casts the deciding vote and gives the speech at the end, but it's a bit anti-climactic for an audience that assumes, yeah, the White race is not morally superior to any other race. Congratulations on your realization, buddy. Long before that, Sam Rockwell’s character is inconsistent. Neither the Rockwell performance nor the Robin Bissell script can thread the needle between showing the heinous terrorist that a Klan member is and revealing the depth that foreshadows the character's change. The answer is to show the character being nice to his developmentally disabled son, which, again, doesn't get all the way there. That's cool that you love your own son, but, uh, that has nothing to do with the hatred that made you shoot up a girl's house because she has a Black boyfriend. Of course you can show these contradictions and changes in a character incrementally--lots of good movies have--but this one ain't going on the list. 122. The Intruder (Deon Taylor)- Probably the most two-star movie of the year. Prototypical in its two-starness. Instructive to me as far as what I give two stars. There’s a point of view error in the first twenty minutes that ruined it for me. ADMIRABLE FAILURES 121. Little (Tina Gordon Chism)- We're all good on body swap movies for a while. This one, otherwise undistinguished in its comedy or storytelling, is notable for just how specifically 2019 it might look in a time capsule: Here's a joke about transitioning as we're on our way to our job developing apps; there's a kid doing The Floss and talking to Alexa. Whoops! Bumped into a guy wearing a VR headset! 120. The Kid Who Would Be King (Joe Cornish)- I appreciate that somebody is still making movies for 9-10 year old boys, but I checked out hard and kind of just left this on until it was done. I don't like lore. Much less funny and urgent than Attack the Block, and it's crazy that this is the only project that came together for Joe Cornish in the intervening eight years. 119. Godzilla: King of the Monsters (Michael Dougherty)- Exhausting and joyless in its large-scale destruction, Godzilla: King of the Monsters pitches everything at the same volume, and even the end of the world ends up not mattering as a result. Despite (or maybe because of) the presence of such great actors, the screenplay dilutes the characters by having three fighter pilots or three scientists when all the lines really could have been given to one of these interchangeable figures. That's first draft stuff, homie. Still, Kyle Chandler is kind of awesome as the weathered one shouting about how everyone else is playing God. He reminds me of Larry Fitzgerald toiling away with professionalism on teams that would never sniff the playoffs. 118. Blinded by the Light (Gurinder Chadha)- I made it about twenty minutes into this movie before flipping the switch and making fun of it relentlessly. It tries to strike the heart-on-sleeve authenticity that a Springsteen song does, but if The Boss never overwhelms you with language, almost every line of dialogue in this film spells out what the character is thinking. The overbearing father is especially intolerable: "What is this music? You need to get rid of distractions and focus on getting a good job so that you don't end up a taxi driver. Like me!" I'm only sort of paraphrasing. Blinded by the Light is too well-meaning to be offensive, but it's absurd in its spoon-feeding. LMK, ladies: On the third time that I have headphones in my ears during a conversation with you, and I start buttering you up with lyrics to "Jungleland," will you still love me? 117. Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (David Leitch)- What a summer, huh? The go-for-broke final setpiece redeems the film somewhat, and Vanessa Kirby is a welcome addition to the universe. But Idris Elba's first line, responding to a question about who he is, is "Bad Guy," and the characterization doesn't go too much further. I feel as if I have honed the requisite disposition to enjoy a Fast and Furious movie, but that doesn't mean that the most cliched thing has to happen at the most cliched time in the most cliched way.

116. I Lost My Body (Jeremy Clapin)- Not for me ultimately. The film presents itself as above the tropes of cinematic romance but sure seems to circle around them. Clapin is willing to set up the pins of, say, "I'm actually the pizza delivery guy but have kept it a secret for a year," but he is unwilling to knock the pins down with anything resembling catharsis. I don't know if the French bowl, but feel free to substitute whatever kind of metaphor they might get offended by.

115. The Lion King (Jon Favreau)- I saw the original Lion King when I was ten: old enough to think that Disney movies were beneath me but young enough to know nothing about art or the world. And I remember the way that the songs transcended reality: "I Just Can't Wait to Be King" turning into a Busby Berkeley number, "Be Prepared" taking on an expressionist green tint. It was mass entertainment that was far from experimental, but I remember thinking, "Can you do that?" As an artistic experiment, this remake is kind of confounding, to the point that I don't know whether to classify it as an animated or live-action film. The final scene starts upside down, and your eye adjusts to the idea that you're looking at a reflection in a stream, but that stream is a Caleb Deschanel-aided, computer-generated reflection of a reality. However, I return to my original point: You're missing something if you think The Lion King is a better story if it's more realistic. Capably made as The Lion King 2019 is, no one is referencing 42nd Street. These Disney remakes just reference themselves. 114. Stuber (Michael Dowse)- The critical community has been pretty forgiving of Stuber; I guess because it's a type of studio film that used to be common but now is not. Judged on its own merits, however, it's labored. The screenplay circles around questions of masculinity, but not in a way that hasn't been done better in other recent comedies. Perhaps most disappointing of all, I've seen Iko Uwais and Bautista fight before, and it looked a whole lot cooler than the way they're sliced and diced here. The ending's sweet at least. 113. After the Wedding (Bart Freundlich)- Think of what Julianne Moore could have accomplished in the time it took in her career for her to shoot four crappy movies with her husband. This is the type of melodrama that makes more sense after all of the revelations have cleared the air, but that doesn't mean the preceding hour and a half was any more fun because of the aftermath. 112. The Goldfinch (John Crowley)- One day someone's going to figure out how to coherently adapt a Dickensian novel and actually do that thing Crowley is trying to do: condensing two hundred pages of back story into 1/8th of a page here or a line there. Somebody's going to be able to figure out the little moments that are important and the big moments that aren't. And you'll all be sorry. The movie is ultimately hampered by the bad ending of the novel, in which a person who isn't a mystery writer has to solve a mystery. Perfect casting for Luke Wilson though. He definitely looks like a whiskey-faced dad who would steal your social security number. 111. The Souvenir (Joanna Hogg)- This movie is autobiographical. The protagonist has the same initials as Joanna Hogg, and she's attending film school at the same time Hogg did. But what a self-own it is for your hero, based on you, to be this inexpressive and restrained and deferential. The film is mostly about a cold romantic relationship--and I guess what the character learns through that experience--but when her beau's friend asks what she sees in him, she can't really say. Neither can the audience. I guess it's a skill to write a scene in which a family is having an argument that is so clenched-jaw reticent that the viewer can't even discern the topic of conversation for a few minutes, but it's not a skill I appreciate. 110. The Dead Don’t Die (Jim Jarmusch)- Jim Jarmusch must be a very good friend.

109. Velvet Buzzsaw (Dan Gilroy)- If the film were funny, I wouldn't mind the lack of narrative drive. If the film had narrative drive, I wouldn't mind the lack of atmosphere--glaring for a film that circles around to horror eventually. If the film had more to say, I wouldn't mind how pedantically it says it. If the protagonist's change of heart made sense, then I wouldn't mind that his conversion apparently happens off-screen. At least most of the actors seem to be having fun. I wasn't. 108. It: Chapter Two (Andy Muschietti)- I started squirming in my seat during a sequence somewhere in the circuitous second hour. Bill sees his old bike in an antiques window, haggles with a Stephen King shopkeeper cameo, and finishes the scene on a triumphant note, believing that his old bike will ride like the wind. Cut to the bike falling apart on the road, deflating his pride with comedy. Cut to a flashback of him riding the bike with young Beverly, serene and warm. Cut to him riding the bike again with determination until he stops, terrified. Within fifteen seconds, the film jerks us into four divergent emotions at a whim. The overall tone felt just as arbitrary to me, and that's before we get to the always-unclear line between fantasy and reality. And this time, the flashbacks of each young character's encounters with Pennywise are less scary because we know they all live into the present. Andy Muschietti just does not have a light enough touch to make this movie work.The last forty-five minutes are interminable. But I had all the same gripes with the first chapter, so personal taste is a factor. 107. Trial by Fire (Edward Zwick)- Perfect example of a true story that could use some poetic justice. I don't want to give away anything that the first line of the imdb summary doesn't already, but this ending could have been much more satisfying by changing one or two lines. This is a movie that recreates, multiple times, babies burning alive, but the ending is somehow more punishing. It's also one of those films that should have just begun at the halfway point. If we can praise special effects when they're done well, then they should be fair game when they're this embarrassing. Zwick definitely put his flash drive into the Lifetime computers for fire.exe.