|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 5, 2023 20:47:27 GMT
My review of Knock at the Cabin Over time, I think M. Night Shyamalan is gradually becoming one of my favourite directors. While there are definitely a few movies in his filmography which don’t really work, he usually is making an interesting movie in a distinct way that has my curiosity. His next movie looked intriguing, a home invasion thriller starring Dave Bautista, Jonathan Groff and Rupert Grint. I made sure to watch only the first trailer and went in fairly blind, and I was thoroughly impressed. Knock at the Cabin is based on a novel called The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul G. Tremblay, which I haven’t read myself. Shyamalan is known for twists and complex plots, and so most people are going into the film expecting that. However, there’s little of that and it’s a fairly straightforward plot. Within the first act, the central dilemma is clearly presented to the main characters and the audience. The lack of a twist might bother people who were expecting it, but it worked for the story. The runtime certainly is in line with the complexity of the plot, with it being only 100 minutes long. It’s a very lean film that just has the essentials yet doesn’t feel underdeveloped. This is Shyamalan’s most contained film, with it focussing on just these characters at the cabin. Every so often the movie will cut to a flashback of the main characters, and it not only did reveals things and provides context to them, it also gives welcome breathers between the tense present day scenes at the cabin. I found the movie to actually be quiet hard hitting and emotional. The central family’s story is handled quite well, and is quiet possibly the most human story that Shyamalan has made. There’s plenty of thematic stuff at play, belief, doubts, faith in humanity, and it almost seems reminiscent of the themes of Signs. Shyamalan’s writing has been criticised for being awkward, mainly with the dialogue. While I somewhat agreed with those criticisms, by the time Old came out, I just sort of took it as a part of his style that made his movies distinct. There is some stiff and awkward dialogue in Knock at the Cabin, but I got used to it after a while. From what I can tell, the novel it’s based on had a much different ending and so I can imagine that readers of that book might not like the direction the movie takes at the end. However, I think it works for what Shyamalan was going for. There is a limited cast who all deliver excellent work here, in fact I think it’s the best overall collection of performances in a Shyamalan movie. The major family as played by Jonathan Groff, Ben Aldridge and Kirsten Cui are great; the family dynamic is one of the key parts of the movie and is beautifully written, and is only further strengthen by their performances. Groff particularly ends up being the heart of the film. The actors who played the 4 invaders in Dave Bautista, Nikki Amuka-Bird, Abby Quinn and Rupert Grint are all good, presenting their characters and their feelings well. Dave Bautista who shone the most in the whole movie, giving probably his best performance yet. As the leader of this group that gives the family a moral dilemma, he infuses so much humanity in this role. He could’ve just been a menacing villain, which we could easily play. Instead, he is earnest, sincere, soft spoken and reserved and you can really tell that he doesn’t want to do the things he’s doing. While people are mixed about his writing, I feel confident in saying that M. Night Shyamalan is a really solid filmmaker. He does well with filming suspense and has a distinct style. Knock at the Cabin just might be his best direction for a movie yet. It is absolutely his best shot movie, the camera movements are creative and fantastic, the angles generate the right feelings needed, and the close ups of faces really helped whether it was increasing tension or capturing the emotions of the characters. Between that, the editing and the score, Shyamalan does well at creating a strong atmosphere. Knock at the Cabin is a tense, lean, intimate and gripping thriller, outstandingly directed and with fantastic performances. Regardless of your thoughts on M. Night Shyamalan’s past movies, I think it is well worth checking out, and I consider it to be amongst his best. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/06/knock-at-the-cabin-2023-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 7, 2023 18:36:39 GMT
My review of The Whale The Whale was one of the recent awards movies I was most nervous about watching. This would be Darren Aronofsky’s next movie since mother! back in 2017, and it would be starring Brendan Fraser in the lead role. While it had been positively received on the whole, there were some polarizing reactions and controversy which made me unsure about how I would land on this. I would say that I liked it but had some clear issues. Even if you didn’t know it beforehand, you could probably pick up on the movie originating from the play very early on. The Whale takes place at one location and consists of a small cast of characters. Even some of the dialogue feels very stagey, especially with lack of subtlety. Although there are some good moments, the screenplay and dialogue interactions can be very repetitive at times, though it usually fixes itself when it starts to feel that way. It isn’t a subtle movie by any means, whether it be with the dialogue or the themes. There’s a lot of things at play thematically, including religion, faith, personal tragedy and depression, and overall, I think it’s a bit messy and obvious with those. The Whale is a dark and heavy movie, though Aronofsky seemed to try to aim for empathy with this movie, however the results are mixed. Much of the movie is bleak, and whenever it leant towards nihilism and hatred, I thought it was convincing and genuine. When it is trying to be empathetic, it felt fake and hollow, especially when watching the story play out. For a movie that tries to reflect the view of protagonist Charlie that “people are amazing”, the movie conveys quite the opposite. In fact, I would’ve admired the movie so much more if it ended up leaning into the hatred of the world and people, because at least it wouldn’t feel so hollow. Another notable theme is honesty, which is also something that Charlie encourages. It’s also another thing that The Whale struggles with. I don’t exactly like using the criticism “emotionally manipulative” when it comes to movies, since all emotions in movies are manipulated by the filmmakers and writers. However, certain moments were clearly intended to make you feel something, and most of them felt artificial to me. The more impactful moments for me were the quiet, tender, and softer moments, as opposed to the over the top dramatic moments, the latter of which had me feeling unsure about them. This also extends to the ending, and I’ve noticed that it made lots of people emotional and cry. In contrast with the other scenes which I wasn’t sure about, I knew for certain that I really didn’t like the ending. Finally, there’s been some talk about whether The Whale is fatphobic, and I really don’t have enough to engage in that discourse, but I can talk about the way it views its protagonist. I will say that I’m pretty sure Aronofsky doesn’t have a negative view of Charlie, the film is sympathetic towards him. Some characters do treat him poorly, but I don’t think the film views him poorly. At the same time, I’m not sure its empathetic towards him (ironically). The acting for the most part does help to make the movie work better. Brendan Fraser gives probably his best performance yet, it’s very dramatic and he goes hard out for that, but I thought it worked. His character of Charlie is optimistic and believes in people despite the things he’s going through or the way people treat him. Much of the character’s positivity and optimism becomes redundant as we don’t really get to unpack that, he’s just positive because he’s just positive. Still, Fraser does help the character feel real and sells it as best as possible. Sadie Sink gives a notable performance in the movie, playing Charlie’s daughter, Ellie. I am fully aware that this is intentional, but she’s written to be such a menace and cartoonishly evil character that its hard to take her seriously. While she’s loud and aggressive, her character is pretty one note despite being one of the main supporting players, and it really could’ve used more nuance and depth. Sink’s performance goes along with that too, the angsty teenager scenes were pretty standard and she’s much better at the more emotional scenes, especially near the end. Hong Chau was one of the best performances of the film for me, playing a nurse and a friend of Charlie. While a lot of the supporting character are underdeveloped, Chau makes her character feel real, and was the most interesting and believable character in the film. Her scenes were really the highlights for me, her dynamic with Fraser was great and even worked better than his dynamic with Sink. Other actors like Ty Simpkins and Samantha Morton are also good in their parts. Darren Aronofsky’s style and direction is usually very overt in his movies, but it’s been toned down quite a lot appropriately for The Whale. Not to say that the movie is directed in a basic way, it’s straightforward and simplistic, but it works for this story. It is shot with a 1.33 aspect ratio which makes you feel claustrophobic, especially given the movie takes place just inside and outside of an apartment. The murky and dim interior is also sets the right tone. Brendan Fraser is wearing a fat suit and prosthetics to make him look obese and fair is fair, he looks completely different. The score from Rob Simonsen is also effective, atmospheric and oppressive, even if it can be a bit overbearing at points. However, the direction isn’t perfect; I wasn’t sure about some decisions that Aronofsky made, mainly in the way Charlie was filmed. The shots of his body and the filming of the binge eating is akin to how David Cronenberg would film grotesque body horror. It’s done for shock value and becomes uncomfortable, and for the wrong reasons which work against the film. The Whale remains a movie that I’m very conflicted about. Some aspects of Darren Aronofsky’s direction work, and many of the performances are great, especially Brendan Fraser and Hong Chau. However, even if you put the fatphobic debate aside, it has plenty of issues that hold it back from really working. The writing is so messy and mixed, from the lack of subtlety, to the rather hollow attempts at being empathetic, and to even the attempts of being emotionally resonant, much of it misfires and was a rather mixed result. I do wonder whether Aronofsky really was the right choice for this film. If it wanted to be more empathetic and human, then it should’ve been handled with more sensitivity and subtlety. That aside, The Whale might be worth checking out for the performances. I guess I liked the film overall, but I understand the people who really don’t. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/08/the-whale-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 9, 2023 18:36:39 GMT
My review of Causeway I heard some good things about Causeway. It was an Apple TV movie that was something of an awards contender and ended up getting a best supporting actor nomination for Brian Tyree Henry. I found it to be a pretty good small and intimate drama. The script is straightforward and minimalist, with a rather predictable story. The initial premise is that Jennifer Lawrence is a soldier who is recovering from PTSD in her hometown. On the whole though, it’s fairly plotless and is more like a collection of interactions strung together. However, it worked for me and it developed quite well over time. It is a movie about broken people, specifically two broken people in Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry’s characters, as they are trying to piece their lives back together. While there’s plenty of these types of movies every year, Causeway handles the subject matter well, and doesn’t over-dramatise its depiction of trauma. It is sincere and doesn’t feel like it’s shooting for awards. It is slow but it didn’t drag, and this slow burn approach and the very quiet nature of the movie really worked for the story. The acting is quiet, subtle and powerful, and it mostly comes down to Jennifer Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry, both of whom give great and believable performances. Their dynamic and friendship is the highlight of the movie, and both of them felt very authentic as their characters. Lila Neugebauer’s debut with Causeway is solid. Her direction is strong and very deliberate: it’s beautifully shot and benefits from a melancholic and understated score from Alex Somer. Causeway is a nuanced, subtle and quietly powerful drama and character study, with two incredible performances from Jennifer Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry. I really do think it’s worth checking out, even just for the acting. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/10/causeway-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 11, 2023 21:09:34 GMT
My review of To Leslie Recently there’s been increased attention put onto To Leslie. To give some backstory, in January, lots of A list actors including Cate Blanchett, Gwyneth Paltrow and Edward Norton were lauding Andrea Riseborough’s performance in a smaller movie called To Leslie, even pushing for her to get nominated at the Oscars. Surely enough, the biggest surprise at the most recent Oscars nominations was Riseborough being among the 5 nominated for Best Actress. Regardless, I decided to watch the movie without thinking too much about the awards. I’d say that overall it’s a decent movie, that is helped by great performances. To Leslie is yet another character study about a struggling addict and there really isn’t anything new about this one. The writing has its issues with some clunky dialogue, cliched conflicts and arguments, and some pacing issues, especially in the first hour. The first half seemed like even more of the white poverty porn which we’ve seen a lot of, and it was a real slog to get through (and not in a good way). However, at the point where Marc Maron’s character is introduced into the plot, it picked up for me. A lot more humanity is on display, and I was more engaged with the story and characters. The ending might be a bit cliché, but it still hits in the way that it was intending to. This is very much an actor’s movie. To Leslie really served as an acting showcase for Andrea Riseborough and she’s great, really elevating the movie with her work here. She conveys so much and brings a lot of life to her character Leslie. The destructive and struggling alcoholic character has been done many times before, but Riseborough adds a real humanity to this familiar story. So yes, the hype for her performance is deserved. It doesn’t end at Riseborough, there is a good supporting cast too. Marc Maron was a surprise, and gives a nuanced, empathetic and down to earth performance as someone who decides to give Leslie a chance. Allison Janney and Owen Teague make the most of their screentime, and they sell their roles incredibly well. This is director Michael Morris’s debut film, and it was pretty good. It is well shot and captures the setting well, and there are some good uses of music. To Leslie is a smaller drama and character study that is familiar and predictable, but solid overall. It’s carried by the great performances, especially from Andrea Riseborough. The movie (and possibly even its lead performance) will likely remain overshadowed by the Oscar nomination controversy. I don’t think it’s a great movie, but for what it’s worth, it might be worth checking out for the acting at least. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/12/to-leslie-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 13, 2023 18:34:28 GMT
My review of Puss in Boots: The Last Wish I was surprised that Puss in Boots of all things was getting a sequel, especially over a decade after the first movie. I enjoyed the Shrek movies and the initial Puss in Boots spin off, but I wasn’t really thinking that I was going to rush out to watch the sequel. So I was curious that it quickly became one of the most popular movies of 2022. I decided to check it out, and I can at least say that it is way better than it had any right to be. So I had been hearing about how special and different Puss in Boots 2 was, it’s really not that different from what you’d typically expect. It’s a very straightforward and linear story with familiar story beats. However, it handles this familiar structure very well. Unlike the first Puss in Boots which was serviceable, but clearly banking on the success from the Shrek brand, The Last Wish feels like there’s actual passion behind it, and the story is heartfelt and genuine enough. I wouldn’t call the movie dark at all, but it does have some somewhat heavier aspects that you wouldn’t expect in a Puss in Boots movie, with themes involving mortality and inevitability of death. However, it’s done in such a way that the film is appropriate enough for children, while having enough things here for adults to enjoy. Some jokes don’t work, but most of them do, and there are particularly some really funny running gags. Overall, the voice acting is strong and the cast does well at portraying the memorable characters. Antonio Banderas and Salma Hayek reprise their roles of Puss in Boots and Kitty Softpaws, with Banderas having the best outing of his character yet. Many of the other actors including Florence Pugh, Ray Winstone, and Olivia Colman voice their roles very well. I thought all the characters were pretty good and worked in their roles, though a comic relief character in the form of a dog I was less amused by. The film also benefits from some memorable villains. One of these villains is Jack Horner voiced by John Mulaney, who is a blatantly and cartoonishly evil character and all the more fun for that. However, the standout is a wolf named Death, voiced by Wagner Moura, who is hunting Puss in Boots over the course of the movie. Any time the character showed up he had such a strong presence, and he was definitely a highlight. The animation is really the strongest aspect of the movie, so fresh and unexpected. It doesn’t go for a shiny photorealistic look like most animated movies nowadays. A very fair comparison has been made between this and the animation in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse; there are a lot of similarities between them, but The Last Wish does enough to make it not just a copy or riff on Spider-Verse. The colours are vibrant, exaggerated and gorgeous, the camera movements are fast and dynamic, the movements of the characters are swift and particularly shine in the snappy and exhilarating action scenes. It’s really helped by a good score from Heitor Pereira. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish is surprisingly good. The story may be familiar, but its handled very well, it is entertaining, funny, creative, and benefits strongly from its stunning animation and great action. It’s also potentially the best movie in the whole Shrek franchise, at the very least it is in competition with Shrek 2. Well worth checking out. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/puss-in-boots-the-last-wish-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 15, 2023 18:41:13 GMT
My review of Marcel the Shell with Shoes On For the past months I had been hearing about Marcel the Shell with Shoes On. It seemed to be some animated movie which ended up being one of the most beloved movies of 2022. I never saw the trailer, but from my brief glimpses of it, I admit I was somewhat confused by the love. I wasn’t sure that I would get into it, but after it was nominated for best animated film, I thought I should at least check it out. I was pleasantly surprised. Marcel the Shell with Shoes On actually originated as a series of shorts which I haven’t watched myself, but after watching the film, I am interested in checking them out. The movie is a mockumentary about the protagonist Marcel, a living shell, and his grandmother. Things develop over the course of the film, but there isn’t a whole lot driving the plot, and its mostly just watching Marcel’s life. You’re sort of just along with the ride, and if you’re not on board in the first 30 minutes, then you’ll probably find the rest of the movie to be a bit of a drag. On the whole. I’d say that it was a pleasant watch. It’s charming, funny and witty, and quite optimistic on life. It goes for something somewhat profound and touching without feeling disingenuous. It’s not all cheery, there are some melancholic and bittersweet moments, and there are some unexpected tonal shifts. While these shifts can be sudden, there’s a pretty good balance throughout. While Marcel might be appropriate for kids, it does seem like adults would get more out of it than children, mainly with some of the mature themes and the dry humour. Marcel is about 90 minutes long and that was the right runtime, it didn’t feel like it overstayed its welcome. There is a very small number of characters here, but it fits the contained nature of the film. The living shell protagonist Marcel is voiced by Jenny Slate and her voice helped bring this character to life; he’s likable and carries the movie well. There’s also his grandmother voiced by Isabella Rossellini, and director Dean Fleischer-Camp even plays one of the main characters too, playing the director of the documentary (also named Dean). I liked his dynamic with Marcel, considering he’s in much of the movie (albeit mostly off camera). Dean Fleischer-Camp directs this well. Marcel is partly live action and partly animated, with everything appearing to be real except for the stop motion shell characters. The stop motion animation especially shines in the live action shots, and it feels real. It’s also deliberately filmed as a mockumentary/faux documentary, and it does appropriately resemble a real documentary, from the zooms, camera movements, audio and even some of the way dialogue is delivered. Finally, its accompanied by a nice and light score from Disasterpeace. Marcel the Shell with Shoes On is a funny, witty and heartfelt mockumentary with good stop motion animation. If you heard about how everybody loved the movie, I’d recommend keeping your expectations in check. It is a light and relaxed movie with very little drive, but I liked it for that. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/marcel-the-shell-with-shoes-on-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 23, 2023 18:38:15 GMT
My review of Blonde I distinctly remember the lead up to Blonde’s release. The idea was certainly intriguing, Ana de Armas was cast as Marilyn Monroe, and it would be directed by Andrew Dominik, who made The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford, Chopper, and Killing Them Softly, and this would be his first movie in 10 years. Not only that, but the source material it was based on seemed to indicate that it would be a very different and unconventional biopic. Then the controversy started, from the spread of awareness about the highly questionable source material which was a fictional take on Marilyn Monroe, to the announcement of it getting an NC-17 rating, to the eventual polarizing reactions of the movie itself. I admit that the very strong reactions caused me to put off my viewing of the film. However, with de Armas being nominated for her performance, I decided I might as well check it out. Unsurprisingly, I ended up being very conflicted about Blonde. I should clarify first of all that I don’t know much about Marilyn Monroe, nor have I seen any of her movies. I think it’s fair on Blonde’s part to acknowledge that it isn’t meant to be a straight up Marilyn Monroe biopic. It is an adaptation of the book, which is itself a fictional take on the icon. While I can sort of get what Andrew Dominik was going for here, perhaps it would’ve been better to have a fictional character based on Marilyn Monroe instead. I understand that focussing it on such an icon would be more impactful for people, but there would’ve been more freedom to tell the story he wanted instead of having to tie it in with true events. As I said, there is a lot of controversy over the way that Marilyn Monroe is presented, mainly with it having her being subjected to abuse and more. Even as someone who doesn’t know much about Monroe, I get the impression that some people don’t want to be confronted with any tragedies that she went through, at least not without an optimistic or upbeat end to it. Even if some of the more extreme content was toned down, people wouldn’t take too kindly to this sort of story for her because it doesn’t reassure them that everything is okay. That being said, it’s still on the creators to handle these topics and events with a degree of care and delicacy, and sadly I have to say that some of the scenes border on exploitation for me. It’s not a full on sensory overload of bad stuff happening, but it is very drawn out. There are sex scenes and nudity but considering the controversy, it wasn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be (although the uses of them do come across as weirdly prominent). It’s just that there are a few key scenes that are somewhat problematic. The rape scenes are very mishandled, a moment in the third act particularly signalled that I was about to check out of the movie entirely. There’s a scene that particularly garnered criticism for being potentially anti-abortion, with the inclusion of a CGI fetus talking to Marilyn Monroe. Even if it was to convey a feeling of guilt, it was misguided at best. The last hour is where the movie really leaned into just making everything worse for Mariilyn Monroe, and that’s where my tolerance wavered. I had has a reveal that twists the knife further, and it turned me off the last minutes of the film entirely. So as someone who doesn’t know much about her, it isn’t exactly a flattering portrayal. If you’re a fan of her in some capacity, I imagine that this would be very difficult to watch. That being said, I had heard lots of these criticisms before going in. So I decided to try to view this version of Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe as if she was a fictional character. I do see what Andrew Dominik is going for with Blonde, he’s going for a tragic portrait of a rising and falling star, of someone that Hollywood and everyone used, abused and spit right now. We first see Norma Jeane in her childhood and it highlighted things which would stick with her throughout the rest of her life. Then when it jumps from childhood to adulthood, it’s very startling and strange. Her rise to fame is jarringly fast, and it feels like it skipped past some critical moments and details. There are multiple threads relating to Norma which Dominik goes for, but there is a real lack of depth and it feels very shallow. The approach to these aspects are very obvious, and that continues to the dialogue too. It comes across as pretentious at points, especially when they state the obvious over and over again. One notable thread is how there is a difference between Norma Jeane the real person and Marilyn Monroe the star. It is conveyed by some very on the nose dialogue, for example, Norma talks to her mother about Marilyn Monroe rising in popularity and says “I guess there isn’t any Norma Jeane”. Blonde also emphasizes the way that men look at Marilyn, her relationships with men, and how men abuse and take advantage of her. By that it usually just has men treat her horribly and have more on the nose dialogue like “Am I meat to be delivered?” . Norma not knowing her father is a massive part of the movie, introduced at the start and carried through to the end. She is constantly searching for him and holds onto any little bit of hope that he’s still out there. Dominik also conveys this by having Monroe refer to her husbands as “Daddy” (and you’ll be hearing that word a lot in the movie). The repetitive and grim nature only makes the nearly 3 hour runtime unbearable and tedious. If it was cut down to 90 minutes, it wouldn’t be missing any key moments or details that would take away from the main points, because Dominik doesn’t give it that much depth. There are some good performances, with standouts in the supporting cast being Bobby Cannavale and Adrien Brody, and they bring believability and nuance to their characters. However the star of the movie is Ana de Armas as Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe. The best thing I can say about de Armas is that she gives a very committed performance. She gives little glimpses of further humanity, and there are opportunities where she gets to shine. However, the script mostly calls for her to be fragile, to cry, and be abused. It really doesn’t help that her character isn’t fully formed. This brings me to the key problem with Blonde: it is hard to get a clear idea of the character. It paints Norma as a tragic figure, someone with traumas and who is abused by so many people. However, there is nothing else to say about her, there are only a couple times where she is shown to have any personal drive or motivations. Despite the movie being in her psyche for a few hours, I didn’t understand her beyond the surface level. There are moments which I can tell would’ve hit harder if I was right there with Marilyn, but we are distanced and disconnected from her. Other tragedies on film like Diana Spencer in Spencer (a fictional take on a real person) or Laura Palmer in Twin Peaks (a fictional character) gives their subjects a clearly defined character. Blonde does not do that with Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe. Andrew Dominik directs Blonde, and he certainly has a unique vision for the film. It’s directed incredibly well on a visual level. The cinematography is stunning with some compelling imagery, and there are some interesting camera techniques. On the editing front, it does make some unique choices, the aspect ratio and colours change often, and there are some creative transitions. Dominik is also great at making scenes feel uneasy, with much of the movie having a very nightmarish and dreamlike feeling. This is only helped further by the excellent, melancholic, and haunting score from Nick Cave and Warren Ellis. That’s not to say that all the technical and directing choices were good. As said before, some of the handling of the sex and rape scenes were in bad taste, whether it be what it showed or how long they went for. Other stuff like the aforementioned CGI fetus imagery is terrible, even with context. After reading all the negative takes on Blonde, I made a strong effort to meet the movie halfway. There are some good aspects; some of Andrew Dominik’s direction is at least interesting; the cinematography is stunning, and the score is amazing. Additionally the performances are solid, or at least committed. With that said, even if you were to remove the uncomfortable portrayal of Marilyn Monroe, I don’t think Dominik’s take on this story succeeded. It lacks the depth and nuance that it sorely needed, and while I tried to not focus on it too much in the review, the feeling that its subject was being exploited really doesn’t help matters. I’m not really sure that I could recommend it, but I guess if you know what you’re going into, maybe it’s worth checking out. If you’re hoping for a Marilyn Monroe biopic though, Blonde is the last place you should look. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/24/blonde-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 25, 2023 20:57:28 GMT
My review of Women Talking I had been waiting to watch Women Talking for some time. Even before the highly positive reactions, I was already sold on the cast, including Rooney Mara, Jessie Buckley, Claire Foy, Frances McDormand and Ben Whishaw. I finally got the chance to see it, and it was incredible. The premise of the movie is simple, following constant attacks and rapes from men, the women of an isolated colony have to make a difficult decision about whether to stay and fight, or to leave. Women Talking is based on a book, which is itself based on true events. Still, with the emphasis on its characters debating and discussing what they are going to do, it could’ve fallen into being too stagey, especially with how self-contained much of the movie is. There is a lot of dialogue and conversations, and its riveting to watch these characters talk. While much of the important scenes focus on the main characters in a barn talking, the scope of the movie is wider than just that. The film touches on some incredibly heavy topics like rape and sexual assault, and I thought the movie handled those well. It can at times be on the nose with its messages, but it is layered, has quite a lot of depth, and is handled with a lot of empathy, sensitivity and nuance. It can be a depressing movie to watch, still there is some hope at the end in spite of the bleakness. There are little moments of humour which fit in seamlessly, and there’s even a romantic subplot between Ben Whishaw and Rooney Mara which doesn’t feel out of place. I do have some minor issues, though they aren’t enough to take away from the movie too much. You do somewhat need to suspend your disbelief with some of the dialogue and writing. The women speak very well considering that as stated in the film, they weren’t allowed to learn to read or write. Also, there is quite literally a “not all men” moment where it cuts to Ben Whishaw’s character, which the film really could’ve done without. One of the film’s biggest strengths is the excellent performances. This has one of the best ensemble casts from 2022, and they convey their characters and emotions so well. Rooney Mara, Jessie Buckley and Claire Foy are fantastic in the lead roles (with Buckley probably being the standout), and Michelle McLeod, Judith Ivey and Sheila McCarthy are equally as good. Frances McDormand is one of the biggest names in the movie, although has altogether 5 minutes of screentime max. One of the biggest surprises was Ben Whishaw, who plays the colony’s schoolteacher who’s recording the conversations, and is one of the only male characters in this movie. He’s great in his role too. Sarah Polley directs this film very well. Despite it being mostly a movie focussing on conversations, Polley does a lot to make Women Talking not feel too limited in scope. It’s edited very well; we don’t see much on-screen violence, and the brief flashes of it convey enough without lingering for too long. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s score is great, it is somewhat subtle and quiet but heightens the movie even further and adds so much to the emotions. Easily one of the best film scores from 2022. The cinematography is also stunning and captures everything perfectly. That being said, one of the biggest criticisms I heard before even going into the film was the desaturated colour grading. I do wonder if changes had been made before the movie’s release, because I thought that the shots from the trailer looked murkier than what I just watched. In any case, the colour grading didn’t bother me too much, and it did well to get me immersed and set the mood of the movie. However, it might’ve worked even better if they went all the way and set it in black and white. Women Talking is a riveting, sensitive, and powerful movie, incredibly written and directed, and with outstanding powerhouse performances from the great ensemble cast, especially from Rooney Mara, Jessie Buckley, Claire Foy, and Ben Wishaw. One of the best movies from 2022. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/26/women-talking-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Feb 27, 2023 18:39:26 GMT
My review of Empire of Light I had heard about Empire of Light, it was an upcoming awards contender from Sam Mendes which would be starring Olivia Colman. I heard some very mixed and disappointing reactions to it, but it seemed to do enough to get nominated for the cinematography from Roger Deakins, so I thought I’d check it out. I don’t think it’s that good considering the talent involved, but its passable. Sam Mendes wrote the script by himself for the first time, and its definitely the worst part of the movie. The plot meanders, I wouldn’t say I was bored but I found it somewhat dull and I wasn’t very invested in it. The plot mainly focuses on a few main aspects, the operation of a theatre (and as such this movie aims at being a love letter to cinema), mental illness (relating to Olivia Colman’s character), and racism (relating to Michael Ward’s character). These three threads just don’t work together at all and I’m not really sure what Mendes was going for here. It jumps between being three separate movies over the course of this one and it doesn’t do anything with any of them. I hesitate to call Empire of Light a love letter to film, because that aspect felt a bit underdeveloped. The other two storylines were worse, and it was messy with how it attempted to take on weighty subject matter. The racial element particularly felt detached from the characters. It’s not even a constant thread throughout, but instead has designated racism moments sprinkled in at various moments where Mendes deems it important. The movie highlights these social issues, but doesn’t really investigate them or do anything with them. Instead it falls back onto half baked tropes and cliches more than anything with value, leaving you with a feeling that you’ve seen these moments done before and better. The only somewhat substantial aspects of the movie are the love of the movie theatre and the central romance, and neither are all that compelling. The movie does benefit from its strong cast at the very least. Olivia Colman is as usual fantastic as the main character, and she really helps to sell her character. The next major character is that of Stephen played by Michael Ward, who does a good job but there are issues with his character. Stephen almost seems like he’s there to serve Colman’s character than to be a character of his own. He doesn’t have much of a personality or identity, and it’s only later in the film that we get his home life. A prominent aspect is a romance between Colman and Ward, and it’s just as well that the chemistry between the actors is strong enough considering that the relationship felt very forced and sudden. Honestly, I would’ve bought it much more if it was just a friendship instead. Other actors like Toby Jones, Colin Firth and Tom Brooke are good, I particularly wished that we got more of Jones because his scenes were usually the standouts in the film. For what it’s worth, Sam Mendes does deliver better when it comes to directing, he is usually pretty reliable on that front at least. The cinematography from Roger Deakins is stunning as usual, even if it’s far from his best work, and helps set the melancholic tone of the film. The production design also brings to life the old locations and settings in 1980s London, particularly with the theatre. The score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is delicate, tender and very good on the whole, even if it sounds like they’re somewhat aping Thomas Newman. Empire of Light has solid performances, good direction, and is strong on a technical front, but it is held back by the messy, underwhelming and somewhat dull story and writing. It did really feel like Sam Mendes had a passion for this story beyond just making Oscar bait, but I don’t think it really came together despite the potential. It’s not bad, just okay at best. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/28/empire-of-light-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Mar 23, 2023 18:48:03 GMT
My review of Living Living was one of the remaining movies I was waiting to watch. The main reason was that in a lot of this year’s awards circuits, Bill Nighy’s performance in this movie was frequently nominated for Best Actor. I was then intrigued when I learned that this was a British remake of Akira Kurosawa’s Ikiru. Eventually it did get a nomination for Best Actor at the Academy Awards, along with Adapted Screenplay, and so I watched it first chance I could. Living ended up being much better than I thought it would be. I know that many who have watched Ikiru are probably concerned with the fact that there’s a remake of it at all. But for what it’s worth, Living adapts the story to Britain quite well. You can see similarities between the two movies, the story beats are the same and even some of the imagery of the original movie is recreated here (including the iconic image of the lead character on a swing). At the same time, they feel thoughtfully and deliberately placed in. It doesn’t feel derivative, there is some clear passion for this story. I was invested enough in the movie that I wasn’t thinking about the similarities, and it manages to be its own thing. It probably helps that its central message is universal. Both films are about mortality and living life to the fullest, even in the face of inevitable death and the relatable fear of not having much time left. So while much of the story is bittersweet, the end message is optimistic. It is a very heartfelt, sensitive, and gentle story, and a politely restrained character study. There was clearly a lot of care taken in crafting the film; it takes its time and is a slow burn, but I was invested throughout. Perhaps the third act did have a bit too much of characters flat out stating the themes, but that’s what Ikiru did too. The movie is relatively short at an hour and 40 minutes, but I think it could’ve afforded to be a little longer. There are some aspects in the second half that I wish had more fleshing out. Bill Nighy is in the lead role and while I haven’t seen a ton of his work, he gives possibly his best performance here. He’s so nuanced and subtle with so many powerfully quiet moments, and he fits the Takashi Shimura role in the original so well. His change over the course of the movie is so genuine and convincing. So much of the film relies on Nighy, and he had me so emotionally invested. The rest of the cast do some great work too, with Aimee Lou Wood and Tom Burke especially leaving strong impressions. Oliver Hermanus’s direction is quite good. The technical elements aren’t anything too special but aren’t a slouch either. Right from the beginning, it seems like efforts were taken to make it look like the movie came from the 1950s, but isn’t so overt that it becomes overbearing or feels like its trying too hard. The cinematography is vivid and captures the time period and setting excellently. One of the stand out aspects of the movie is the elegant piano centric score from Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch. It’s incredible and pleasantly melodic music which carries so much emotion, accompanying the rest of the movie excellently. Living is an understated, melancholic and existential drama with fantastic performances, especially from a phenomenal Bill Nighy. Whether you’ve watched Ikiru before or not, I highly recommend checking it out. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/03/24/living-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Mar 29, 2023 18:42:03 GMT
My review of John Wick: Chapter 4 John Wick: Chapter 4 was one of my most anticipated movies of 2023. John Wick franchise really had an interesting journey. The first film released back in 2014, and people at the time didn’t really expect it to be good, but it became something of a cult hit. With its next sequels it quickly became one of the most notable action franchises of recent years, with each entry somewhat surpassing the previous movie in some way. As someone who loves the John Wick movies, I was really looking forward to how the fourth movie would be, and I have to say that John Wick Chapter 4 isn’t only the best movie in the series, but also one of the best action movies of recent years. Chapter 4 is unsurprisingly even larger than the previous three films. There’s even more worldbuilding, the scope and scale expands with more locations, a large array of memorable supporting characters, and also a higher body count. It is also a very long movie at 2 hours and 50 minutes, and while I know this will be a turn off for people, I thought it worked really well. In spite of the many action set pieces, the plot takes its time, which helps considering a lot happens across its runtime. It doesn’t wear out its welcome and it never felt boring to me. It’s also the funniest John Wick movie, from the one-liners, to Charlie Chaplin levels of physical comedy. At the same time the story is pretty good and one that I was invested in, even if much of it is stringing one action set piece to another. It is a personal story for John Wick, and touches on themes of loss, regret, and vengeance. It is enjoyably campy and silly without getting self-conscious or snarky, but also is told with a sincerity which helped me get on board with it from beginning to end. There are even some moments that particularly bring the emotions. Then it all builds to a giant climax which is just action perfection, one of the best third acts I’ve ever seen for an action film. The cast here are great, in fact it’s probably the best collection of actors in all the four movies. Over the past near decade, Keanu Reeves has made John Wick one of his al- time iconic roles. There has been a real natural progression to Wick’s story during these four movies; his journey is well thought out and I particularly like the places that it goes in this movie. This character may be a man of few words, but Reeves conveys so many feelings and emotions in small subtle ways and through his line deliveries. Laurence Fishburne, Ian McShane, and the late Lance Reddick reprise their respective roles and reliably deliver strong performances. The new cast and characters are great and memorable too. Hiroyuki Sanada as usual is a great presence whenever he’s on screen, and Rina Sawayama is really good in her debut performance, especially with the action. Bill Skarsgard is entertaining and effortlessly hateable as the central villain, one of the better antagonists in the series. This movie has many people after John Wick, but there’s a couple that get the most attention; as a mysterious tracker with a dog, Shamier Anderson is really good and adds a unique presence, and Donnie Yen is amazing and might’ve been the standout to me. As blind assassin Caine, Yen’s action scenes are very entertaining, and I loved the scenes, dynamic and interactions between him and Wick. Scott Adkins dons a fat suit and prosthetics to deliver an unrecognisable and scene scenestealing performance, he’s very entertaining in his scenes. Other supporting actors like Clancy Brown and Natalia Tena also bring it to their scenes. Chad Stahelski has been showing himself as one of the best action directors working today with the John Wick movies, and with every film, he somehow tops what he did before. Everything feels grand and epic, and its fantastically put together. The cinematography is outstanding, with fantastic lighting and composition, and the production design is excellent as always. The highlights of these movies however are the action, and they did not disappoint here. There are some incredible set pieces, the fights are so well choreographed and have excellent stuntwork. The action ranges from silly and slapstick to absolutely brutal (unsurprisingly). I don’t want to spoil the sequences as they are best experienced for yourself, but there’s plenty of variety to make each one feel fresh. It also does a good job avoiding making Wick feel invincible and easily plowing through enemies, as he is put up against harder odds. The third act is just pure masterful action, with stellar set piece after stellar action set piece, all of them thrilling, intense and entertaining. The score from Tyler Bates and Joel J. Richard is solid and adds to the action scene, and even to the quieter moments. John Wick: Chapter 4 is highly satisfying and entertaining, beautifully directed with fantastic set pieces, and with memorable characters and performances. It’s impressive on all fronts, one of the best action movies of recent years, and already my favourite movie of the year. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/03/30/john-wick-chapter-4-2023-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Mar 31, 2023 21:11:04 GMT
My review of Argentina, 1985 I didn’t know much about Argentina, 1985 before going into it. All I knew was that it is one of the movies nominated for Best International Feature, and it won that award at the more recent Golden Globes. It turned out to be a riveting historical courtroom drama which was great. I didn’t know much about the events that Argentina, 1985 is based on, so naturally I found this very interesting and informative to watch. For those wondering about whether they can get into this, it’s a very accessible movie. It’s a good courtroom drama, conventionally told and straightforward, with a fairly simple story. It is gripping, told with a lot of weight, and you really feel the high stakes. It can be a heavy movie at times, mainly when we hear accounts from survivors. Still, there are little moments of humour which lighten up the tension, but don’t feel out of place. Despite the length of 2 hours and 20 minutes, it doesn’t feel that it’s too long, helped by the somewhat fast pace. The performances from everyone were really good. Ricardo Darin is in the lead role of the main prosecutor and he’s great and convincing. The rest of the cast including Pedro Lanzini are also good. The actors playing the victims make an impression in their scenes too, especially Laura Paredes. The direction is fairly simplistic from Santiago Mitre, but overall, his work is solid. The cinematography is slick, and the production design and editing are good. Argentina, 1985 is a great historical drama, well acted and directed, and has a compelling story which I was engaged with from beginning to end. I highly recommend checking it out. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/04/01/argentina-1985-2022-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Apr 2, 2023 19:39:25 GMT
My review of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves I’m not familiar with Dungeons & Dragons, I never played it, but I definitely heard about it. The last attempt at making a movie based on the popular tabletop roleplaying game was back in 2000, and from what I heard it was to less than stellar results. 23 years later however, they are giving it another go. Despite a cast led by Chris Pine and being helmed by the writers and directors of the underrated Game Night, I had my reservations going into Honor Among Thieves. The trailers weren’t the best and made it look like a generic fantasy action comedy with typical MCU style quips. However, it turned out to be one of the more surprising movies from this year. As someone who hasn’t played Dungeons & Dragons, I can’t speak with high creditability as to how accurately it captures the game, but from my limited knowledge, the movie did feel like a D&D game. The plot really isn’t anything special, so it is just as well that the writing is as great as it was. The story is cliché and predictable but is nonetheless well handled. It plays like an old fashioned fantasy adventure and strikes the perfect tone. It is fully aware of the genre it is in and doesn’t take itself so seriously, and its quite charming. There’s a lot of good and clever humour, and most of the jokes land. High fantasy action comedies are hard to pull off, but Honor Among Thieves does a wonderful job at it. For those who have seen Game Night, it is more in line with that movie than you would initially think, especially with the comedy. Despite all that, there are some surprising emotional story beats and character development that play at the right level, it’s not too serious and retains the self-awareness, but is genuine and earnest enough for you to care about the characters and what’s going on. With this being a fantasy movie, there’s a lot of worldbuilding and plenty of backstories given to characters, items and fantasy races, which is probably why the end film is 2 hours and 14 minutes long. The movie entertained me from beginning to end, but perhaps they could’ve cut down a little on the exposition. So much of the movie is helped by the great and likable cast of characters, who have really good chemistry together and help to sell the comedy. You can tell that everyone was having a lot of fun making it. The central band of characters in Chris Pine, Michelle Rodriguez, Justice Smith and Sophia Lillis are great and fun to watch. Regé-Jean Page is a standout and steals the scenes he’s in, I’d watch a whole spin off movie focussing on his character. The villains really are pretty generic, but that’s fine for this story. Still, it helps that one of the villains played by Hugh Grant is very entertaining and funny in his scenes, even if he’s not in the movie as much as you’d like. John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein directed this well. The visuals are good with some very nice scenery and good sets. There was a surprising number of practical effects, including animatronics. Occasionally the CGI can look really off, but that is easy to look past, and it looks really good for the most part. The action is also strong, whether it be smaller scale fights between Michelle Rodriguez and multiple people at the same time, or much larger set pieces involving dragons. There’s a lot of creativity in these scenes, especially when it comes to the camera movements. Lorne Balfe’s score is also great and fits the movie and its tone really well. Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves is a surprisingly fun, cleverly written and entertaining fantasy action comedy, with great and likeable performances and characters. I wouldn’t mind if we got more of these movies, whether it continues the story of these characters or focus on a different set of characters in the universe. Even if you were turned off by the trailers, I think Honor Among Thieves is well worth checking out, especially in a cinema with a crowd. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/04/03/dungeons-dragons-honor-among-thieves-2023-review/ |
|
|
|
Post by RedSparrow on Apr 4, 2023 10:44:07 GMT
My review of Causeway I heard some good things about Causeway. It was an Apple TV movie that was something of an awards contender and ended up getting a best supporting actor nomination for Brian Tyree Henry. I found it to be a pretty good small and intimate drama. The script is straightforward and minimalist, with a rather predictable story. The initial premise is that Jennifer Lawrence is a soldier who is recovering from PTSD in her hometown. On the whole though, it’s fairly plotless and is more like a collection of interactions strung together. However, it worked for me and it developed quite well over time. It is a movie about broken people, specifically two broken people in Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry’s characters, as they are trying to piece their lives back together. While there’s plenty of these types of movies every year, Causeway handles the subject matter well, and doesn’t over-dramatise its depiction of trauma. It is sincere and doesn’t feel like it’s shooting for awards. It is slow but it didn’t drag, and this slow burn approach and the very quiet nature of the movie really worked for the story. The acting is quiet, subtle and powerful, and it mostly comes down to Jennifer Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry, both of whom give great and believable performances. Their dynamic and friendship is the highlight of the movie, and both of them felt very authentic as their characters. Lila Neugebauer’s debut with Causeway is solid. Her direction is strong and very deliberate: it’s beautifully shot and benefits from a melancholic and understated score from Alex Somer. Causeway is a nuanced, subtle and quietly powerful drama and character study, with two incredible performances from Jennifer Lawrence and Brian Tyree Henry. I really do think it’s worth checking out, even just for the acting. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/02/10/causeway-2022-review/I loved this one. Good to see Jen Lawrence do some indie again. |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Salander on Apr 4, 2023 20:11:00 GMT
My review of Bardo, False Chronicles of a Handful of Truths I had heard about Bardo for a while, it would be the next film from Alejandro González Iñárritu (7 years after The Revenant). The reactions seemed very polarizing, the general consensus was that it has fantastical visuals, but it was overlong and self indulgent. After it was nominated for Best Cinematography, I figured that I should give it a watch at the very least. Coming out of it, I had mixed feelings but I’m prepared to say that I liked it. It is a bit hard to sum up what the movie is about, beyond the fact that it focuses on a Mexican documentary filmmaker and journalist and his headspace. I got the impression that is something of a pseudo biopic for Alejandro González Iñárritu, it certainly feels personal to him. It is very self indulgent but it seems aware of that, in fact at times it plays like an intentional self parody. It does seem to be playing with a lot of themes, including artistic aspirations, family history, and being lost between countries. Many of these themes are shown in interesting ways. You can tell early on that it’s going to be a weird movie, with some of the stylistic choices that are made, especially with its use of surrealism. Within the first hour I was at least intrigued in this chaotic and weird world that the movie existed in. But at a point after this, I stopped being interested, and it began to feel tedious. The choice to lean harder into surrealism and the abstract didn’t always work. Some of these segments can be special, but they became a little dull after a while. There are times where the movie had my interest, and other times where it lost it. The movie meanders aimlessly a lot, and the storytelling can be a little exhausting, made worse by the very slow pacing. It’s around 2 hours and 40 minutes, and you certainly feel it. Daniel Giménez Cacho plays the main character and he’s really good in his part. He’s in almost every scene, and for as weird as the movie gets, he really holds everything together. Other actors are good in their parts, including Griselda Siciliani and Ximena Lamadrid. While some of his decisions were for the worse, Alejandro González Iñárritu’s direction is at least admirable. One of the most praised aspects was the cinematography and it deserves all the praise. This is a gorgeous looking movie, and it’s shot in extreme wide angle so you see all the details. There are some locations and images where the visuals are not too dissimilar from a Terrence Malick film. The surreal imagery don’t always work but they are impressive and creative, and helped by the movie’s dream-like quality. There’s no denying that Bardo is an ambitious film, but I admired it more than I actually liked it. The acting is good, there are some interesting themes and ideas, it is creative with memorable imagery, and the cinematography is sublime. However, my interest really waned over the course of its very long runtime, and I couldn’t help but find much of the experience to be tedious. I’m not sure I can really recommend it to just anyone, but if you’re open to a weird and surreal film, give it a go. thecinemacritic.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/bardo-false-chronicle-of-a-handful-of-truths-2022-review/ |
|
