Showing posts with label Ridley Scott. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ridley Scott. Show all posts

Sunday, July 21, 2019

Mini Reviews for July 15-21, 2019

HELLO! The randomly selected reader suggestion for this week is Fireproof. Honestly not sure if I would have preferred another Adam Sandler movie. This next week is the last week of summer break for me, so it's the last week I'll be taking suggestions! I'll keep the rest of the suggestions in the pool, and if you want to put in a suggestion for next week (or put in another one), here's the link:

Just click here to submit a suggestion for next week's review post! Last week to do this!

Movies

Fireproof (2008) Reader Suggestion!
In the context of a world in which God's Not Dead and its combative ilk exist, it's tempting to look at a relatively more genteel Evangelical Christian movie like this or the megachurch-leaders-turned-film-auteurs Stephen and Alex Kendrick's previous movie, Facing the Giants, with gratitude. It's also a Christian movie that knows what a metaphor is and how to create one visually, which is a miracle that definitely should have been included in that final montage of Facing the Giants. But no! I refuse to fall under any kind of Stockholm Syndrome over the rare Evangelical movie that shows me the barest-minimum cinematic kindnesses. This movie is bad on such a fundamental level: the aforementioned visual metaphors are merely side-effects of a director whose only skill is knowing in which of the four cardinal directions to point the camera, and the movie is put together with such a ham-fisted and bone-headed ethos that the whole thing practically quivered to pieces the moment the first of its many K-Love-core music montages hits the screen. And then the story—when I was little, I remember being told quite a bit that God isn't a vending machine or Santa Claus, but this is precisely the paper-thin view of reality that this film is locked into. Like Facing the Giants before it, Fireproof cannot conceive of a world in which being a devout Evangelical Christian does not result in God's rewarding that fervor in the most direct way possible, and accordingly, it cannot conceive of a man who will not be rewarded with a woman provided he treats her nicely for forty days—which is ridiculous on a lot of levels, but especially considering how the husband in this movie is such a swinging dick with deeply toxic impulses (the sheer number of times he beats something to pieces with that baseball bat) and yet manages to "win back" his wife with only the most basic acts of decency like doing the dishes and fixing dinner and, like, not yelling at her. The pieces of the "Love Dare" we're shown in this movie do nothing to address the fundamental dysfunction of the marriage we see in the movie's rather harrowing opening scene, but Fireproof is so committed to the idea of the husband "earning" his wife's love that it never stops to consider that love isn't an exchange of kindnesses or a machine in which certain inputs automatically yield certain outputs, but rather a profound and messy entangling of two human beings. The movie makes a few gestures toward the unconditional love of Christ, which is both theologically problematic (I'm sure it doesn't mean to imply this, but the movie very much positions salvation as merely a step toward a happier marriage instead of anything spiritually significant—an egregious diminishing of the works of Jesus, to say the least) as well as just grossly patriarchal, since it by implication casts the husband as Jesus being battered for iniquity and the wife as the wayward sinner resisting his unconditional love. I realize this is a pretty common framing of marriage within Evangelicalism ("husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church," etc.), but 1. that interpretation misuses that verse when it becomes a roundabout justification for why wives should be obligated to love their husbands (definitely what this movie is going for), and 2. this movie is too stupid even to know how to make dynamic human drama within that framework anyway. It's all so dumb and boring and shallow, and I hate it. Grade: D

Lu Over the Wall (夜明け告げるルーのうた) (2017)
The story elements are pretty much garbage across the board—thin characters, lumpily structured screenplay, etc., although I think there are some interesting ideas here regarding grief and commercialization that get kind of buried in all the narrative flotsam. But oh man, the animation style—it's no secret by now that Masaaki Yuasa is one of the best, most forward-thinking animation directors out there, and while this is hardly his most formally dazzling movie, it does accomplish one of his most impressive technical feats in that it takes Flash animation and makes it legitimately gorgeous. The color, blobby, overly smooth textures of that style are uniquely suited to the extremely watery story, and it's a wonder to behold. Also, for a movie about a band, it's a welcome grace note that the music slaps. Grade: B

We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011)
The character of Kevin being so one-dimensionally EVIL keeps this movie from anything close to a compelling thesis on parenting or child psychology or mass-shooter psychology or any of the number of interesting issues the film brushes past. There's always the implication that Tilda Swinton's character gives us an unreliable POV through the film's flashbacks, which might make a provocative point about how we retroactively rationalize tragedies by creating cartoon villains out of their perpetrators if the movie had decided to commit to the unreliability just a tad more—as it is, there isn't a ton about the present-day scenes that flags the memories as distorted, particularly the final scene with Kevin in the prison. Which means that this movie is, despite its fancy arthouse trappings, pretty much in the territory of The Omen: a horror movie by way of a miserable walk alongside an unspeakable evil manifested in the form of a child and reflected in the abusive actions of the parent. Oh, but it is exquisitely miserable, though; Lynne Ramsay fills the film (esp. in the early goings) with a litany of disorienting camerawork that focuses on obscure textural details like distorted reflections twisting the characters into their psychologically true forms or mundane objects cropping shots into diabolically sideways glances at violence. The device of cutting to red paint at the precise moment we would expect to see blood is a consistently rattling one, too, and Tilda Swinton + Ezra Miller is the hellish screen duo I never knew I wanted. Oh, and per usual, Lynne Ramsay brings an absolutely choice soundtrack to make this all slide down. Exceptional craft on all fronts in service of a frustratingly unserious engagement with its topic. Grade: B

American Gangster (2007)
Those who say that this movie doesn't add much to the "revisionist gangster picture" genre that the likes of The Godfather and Goodfellas didn't already cover are both right and also kind of missing the point. Yes, it is a rehashing of how the sociopolitical thrust of the 20th century in America has created a system in which a lot of the boundaries between law enforcement, organized crime, and corporate capitalism are merely ceremonial distinctions that annoint prejudice and capital as arbiters of morality. But I'd say the framing of this story within an explicitly African-American perspective (or at least halfway framing it that way—there is still the Russell Crowe half of the film, which is largely boring, I think)—and not just an African-American perspective but an African-American perspective explicitly in opposition to an Italian-American perspective—is a fundamentally new way to approach these themes, and even if the movie does kind of feel stylistically on autopilot for large pieces of it, it's still pretty interesting to see the tropes of the genre play out differently, even on a relatively small scale, e.g. the use of soul, funk, and disco on the soundtrack to mark the passing years instead of Sinatra and the Rolling Stones. It's also one of the first major films of this style to be made after the memeified popularity of De Palma's Scarface, as well as in the wake of HBO's The Wire, which gives the movie an interestingly elegiac stance toward its crime-lord subject. The story of, for example, The Godfather is the story of ethnicity clawing its way into whiteness and then embodying its worst attributes, while the fact of Denzel's character's blackness makes that sort of narrative into a Greek tragedy rather than the Shakespearean one that Pacino's Michael Corleone embodies; Denzel is not a victim of his own worst impulses but rather a system that capriciously punishes only some of its adherent's worst impulses, which makes the movie present the guy with a measure of sympathy that a lot of previous mob epics lack—a less nuanced narrative, for sure, but it also is a much more politically direct one re: the limitations of the American Dream for people unable/unwilling to assimilate into the default-respectable majority. I've spilled a lot of ink over a movie that, on the whole, is pretty solidly middle-of-the-road, so don't take this as a complete ringing endorsement or anything, but there's a spark here that won't die. Grade: B

Television

Angel, Season 3 (2001-2002)
Angel's third season is a considerable step forward for the series. The show's episodic structure melds the case-of-the-week elements with its serialized, mythological flourishes in a much more organic way than in previous seasons, and after the game-changing Pylea arc at the end of the last season, the mythology of the show has become both a lot more fun and whimsical while also becoming a lot deeper. Really kooky stuff happens here involving demon babies and curses and magic sex, and the third season is able to spin this into some powerfully tragic arcs involving Wesley and Angel. It's still a little uneven from episode to episode, and the "LA noir" aesthetic is still pretty bland. But this is the first time in this series where I've felt like the long-term plotting was anything close to as engaging as what Buffy was doing around the same time, and that's pretty exciting. Plus, there's a real corker of a cliffhanger at the end of the season, too. Grade: B+

Music

Lil Nas X - 7 (2019)
Haters may hate, but for this writer, the saga of "Old Town Road" and its ability to riiiiiiide the charts 'til it can't no more is the feel-good story of the year. It doesn't hurt that the song itself is a bop. The rest of the songs on this EP are respectable but not amazing, but it only works in this EP's favor that 25 percent of its songs are versions of "Old Town Road." Grade: B






Matmos - Plastic Anniversary (2019)
Like their previous album, Ultimate Care II, which was created entirely from sounds sampled from the washing machine of the same name, Plastic Anniversary is an album that shocks by how thoroughly it justifies its gimmicky concept. This time, the album is constructed entirely from sampled sounds made with plastic objects—plastic wrap, plastic tubes, plastic silicone gel implants for breast augmentation... it's all here. There's an ecological bent to some of this (e.g. the apocalyptic "Collapse of the Fourth Kingdom" and its visions of the earth's death by microplastics) and a more humanly political bent to other parts ("Thermoplastic Riot Shield"), but mostly, it's just an engaging experimental-electronic album. I caught this duo live a few weeks ago, and they were delightful and surprisingly hilarious; that extends to the album itself, which has this great sense of play beyond the other thematic aims I've already mentioned. It's a ludicrous concept for an album, and Matmos are having a ball. Grade: B+

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Mini-Reviews for May 15 - 21, 2017

Just survived the last full week of school. Commence celebration!

Movies

Alien: Covenant (2017)
Ask a dozen people what was wrong with the 2012 Alien prequel, Prometheus, and you'll get a dozen different answers. Based on the online reaction thus far, the same seems to be be true of Prometheus's sequel, Alien: Covenant. And make no mistake: this is not a perfect movie. The plotting is haphazard, lurching awkwardly from cheap-thrills horror (there is a shower scene that is already, and justifiably, becoming infamous) to cosmic philosophizing, and the screenplay underwrites several key characters, most significantly Katherine Waterston's. But whereas I thought Prometheus failed by leaving its most intriguing philosophical ideas on the table to grow cold and mangled by a dysfunctional screenplay and a reckless abandon for grotesque action, Covenant actually manages to pick up those ideas and run with them in absolutely fascinating ways. The xenomorph action is interesting enough (and appropriately disgusting), but where this movie really shines is in its Big Ideas: the ideas of creation as sadism, of biogenesis, of the relationship between creator and creation—ideas gestured toward in Prometheus but only truly realized here. And they're all developed mesmerizingly via a Michael Fassbender performance (performances, really) to die for. The xenomorph is a sideshow, honestly. The movie (after a brief prologue) begins and ends with Fassbender's android in isolation, and I can't think of a better way for the film to introduce its most compelling character—it's this guy you should be watching. Grade: A-

Nocturnal Animals (2016)
The first thing you'll notice about Nocturnal Animals is its exquisite formalism—this movie looks ravishing, nearly every frame (especially within the nighttime scenes) crafted with the eye of a master stylist. In fact, it looks so great that the second thing you notice might not even register on any level but a naggingly subconscious one. But pay attention; this second thing is very important, and that is that this movie kind of sucks. Aside from its stunning formal achievements (nothing to sneeze at, believe me), the movie is a failure on nearly all narrative and structural metrics. Splitting the story between a "real life" art gallery owner (Amy Adams) and an enactment of the novel manuscript she's reading, the movie cross-cuts between the psychological Expressionism of Amy Adams's plot (where the novel, written by her ex-husband, triggers memories of her tumultuous relationship with the author) and the B-movie smut of the novel's boilerplate murder/revenge saga. The B-movie segments are by-far the superior of the two halves, but by switching frequently between the occasionally robust novel narrative and the positively anemic and thin Amy Adams plot, the film saps the energy out of all of it. At least it's pretty to look at. Grade: C

Fireworks Wednesday (چهارشنبه سوری) (2006)
Released in Iran a decade ago but only recently in the United States, Fireworks Wednesday is a minor, early work by Iranian master Asghar Farhadi. But given that this is Farhadi, of course "minor" still means "quite good." Containing elements of the domestic thriller that Farhadi would later refine to high art, Fireworks recognizably belongs with his filmography, a tense, often exciting, ultimately crushing drama involving a marital spat and the housekeeper unlucky enough to be positioned between the spouses. It's a much looser, less precise feature, being split between the two spouses, than the taut, brutally efficient plotting of A Separation or The Past, but the grounding of the film in the housekeeper's POV is an interesting wrinkle, using her limited knowledge to craft the film into a low-key mystery. Farhadi wouldn't achieve real greatness until his next feature, About Elly, but Fireworks Wednesday is a robust accomplishment regardless. Grade: B+

Solaris (2002)
I haven't read the original Stanisław Lem novel, but word on the street is that when adapting the book—a tall order, given that it already had a masterful and beloved adaptation by Andrei Tarkovsky (my least-favorite Tarkovsky, but of course great nonetheless)—Steven Soderbergh aimed to stick closer to the novel's vibes than the earlier Soviet classic. I can't tell you if Soderbergh succeeded on that metric, but on a regular old movie metric, Soderbergh's Solaris succeeds tremendously, maybe even as much as Tarkovsky's. Relative to the Soviet classic, there are definitely far fewer color-tinted driving, and the runtime is handsomely trimmed by a third (both welcome modifications), and in general, the vibe is much more tactile than the occasionally opaque Tarkovsky touch—we really feel the tangible reality of these characters, which makes it all the more unsettling when their identity is called into question. It's a hypnotic, creepy, and fascinating film; in re-adapting classic source material, Soderbergh crafts one of his absolute best. Grade: A-

Music

Kendrick Lamar - DAMN. (2017)
DAMN. is not as good as any of Kendrick Lamar's last three releases. But since that is just to say that DAMN. is not a mind-bending masterpiece, that's not really much of a qualification. So how about this: DAMN. is Lamar's most scattered, inconsistent release yet, and it's one where he, seemingly intentionally, plays up his most #problematic characteristics—his use of the word "bitch," his depictions of women, etc.—in the interest of rigorous self-reflection that sometimes feels more like some dissonant combination of punishment and aggrandizement than commentary. Which is its own kind of commentary, and interesting commentary at that. But an "interesting" work is not necessarily a successful one. DAMN. is certainly successful—very successful, even—in stretches: the scathing, Fox-News-gutting "DNA.", the despairing, world-weary "FEEL.", the U2-featuring "X*X.", to name a few. It's cool to see Kendrick performing in what is, on the surface, a more mainstream-ready sound than he's touched in several years, and that's offset nicely by what is probably the most interior, abstract concept he's yet tackled—basically, a at-times stream-of-consciousness exploration of the competing impulses of his psyche and the ways that manifests itself in his life, his relationships, and his belief in God (lampshaded most prominently by the juxtaposition of mirror-image track concepts: "LUST." followed by "LOVE.", etc.). But the execution of that concept is where things get a bit dicey, not just because the track-to-track excellence wavers (e.g. I'm not a huge fan of "LOVE." or "LUST.") but because his commitment to the concept itself is slippery. Parts of the album are as incisive and biting as Kendrick Lamar has ever been, but other sections feel only cursorily thought through, skimming over the surface of interesting issues. It's not fatally flawed, and given the way Lamar's music has a way of opening up and metamorphosing over time, I may be premature in writing this review. But as it is, the album feels wounded in such a way that keeps it from stretching up toward greatness. Grade: B+

Sunday, August 24, 2014

100 Years...100 Movies 97-98: Blade Runner, Yankee Doodle Dandy

Hello all! I'm working my way through AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies list, giving thoughts, analyses, and generally scattered musings on each one. For more details on the project, you can read the introductory post here.

Counting the movies in this post, I have exactly four movies left on the AFI list, which means that I can't continue at my normal clip of three movies per post. So instead, you'll notice that I'll cover these last four movies over two posts of two movies each. Cool? Cool. Also, this post includes the very last movie I have to watch for the first time for this series. Woot woot! The excitement! The bittersweetness!

97. Blade Runner (1982, Ridley Scott)
Okay, so I'll be honest here: I think it's a royal pain in the hindquarters when movies have more than one version. I realize that all sorts of reasons go into the existence of multiple cuts/editions, including studio interference, directorial hubris, and MPAA ratings-board compliance. But you know what? It's still a major inconvenience that there are two different versions of, say, Apocalypse Now out there because it inevitably leads to the feeling that I haven't really seen this movie until you've seen x cut, and dang it, I shouldn't have to see two versions of the same movie to have really seen the movie. Most of that is just laziness on my part combined with my sometimes unhealthy prioritization of breadth over depth (e.g. I'd almost always rather see a movie I've never seen before than rewatch something), and I do feel a little bad about that. But seriously, seven[1] different versions of Blade Runner? All this tiresome rant is to say that no, I haven't seen every cut of Blade Runner, and yes, it does sort of bug me that I haven't, but no, I'm not making any real attempt to seek out the versions I haven't seen. I couldn't even really tell you which versions I've seen besides The Final Cut. So maybe this means that I haven't really seen Blade Runner. I don't know. What I do know is that in the end, it doesn't really matter, because the versions of the movie I have seen are amazing. The film is one of the best intersections of hard sci-fi, philosophic artistry, and special effects ever. The acting is uniformly phenomenal, too, and it's a real treat seeing Harrison Ford give a career highlight in one of the only roles ever to allow him to explore real existential depth in a character. Oh, and then there's the cinematography's unparalleled eye for catching incredible imagery out of the already evocative setting. It's great stuff, and one of my personal favorites, multiple versions be darned.


98. *Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942, Michael Curtiz)
So, here's the last movie I'm watching for the first time for this series. It's... ehhh... Well, okay, I'll put it this way: on a technical level, it's finenothing too fancy, but also nothing totally embarrassing, either. Yankee Doodle Dandy is a mostly well-made movie, which is not a surprise if you remember that Michael Curtiz also directed none other than Casablanca[2], though I could quibble with the use of flashback and voiceover to build the film's story and with the cuts during the musical segments. The acting, too, is fine, with James "Made It, Ma" Cagney throwing himself into his role as famed Broadway mogul George M. Cohan with admirable enthusiasm. That level of technical proficiency in the production is nothing to sneeze at, so don't hear me calling this movie a complete failure or anything. But good night, folks, there's also the content of the film. Just how much unironic nationalism can one movie cram into a two-hour runtime? Quite a lot, as it turns out. Look, I realize that Cohan is a real-life figure and that these songs would have to be included in a film adaptation of his life. I also realize that this movie was made in the middle of World War II, which would have made any sort of critique of America's blind patriotism difficult to pull off. But man, the U.S.A!-U.S.A.!-ness of the movie really does rub my 21st-century perspective the wrong way, especially when it comes to the rah-rah-hang-'em-high nature of the movie's treatment of war. I'll give the movie this much: songs like "Over There" are way more fun, musically at least, than modern equivalents like "Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue" (legitimate question: is mainstream country the only genre that still writes patriotic anthems?), and as such, the lavish spectacle of the musical segments do have an engaging gaudiness to them. Still, that's not enough to rescue the film from the sort of unselfconscious grossness of its unexamined Americanism. All this would definitely be forgivable, though, if the movie were at least dramatically interesting, but alas, that's not the case. I'm sure Cohan, like all human beings, was a complicated individual with all sorts of interesting facets to explore. Watching this movie, though, you would be forgiven for thinking that his life was an inert series of successes, punctuated by only the most fleeting conflicts with those around him. So yeah, I'm not exactly thrilled with this one. It's a bummer that the last new movie on this list ended up being one I'm so unenthused with. But oh well. There have been plenty of other great ones I've seen along the way.

One more post, folks. This is getting real. If you want to add something, go ahead and jump right into the conversation. I love hearing from you dedicated readers, especially you lovely people who stuck it out this whole project. Until next time!

Feel free to read the previous post in the series, #s 93-96, here.
Update: You can read the final(!) post in the series, #s 99-100, here.

1] Admittedly, there are only four versions that ever saw significant releases on home media, but still. That's a lot of Blade Runners.

2] There's a cool symmetry to this list in that both the third and third-from-the-last movies were directed by Curtiz. Well, I think it's cool. Easily amused, I guess.