Change Your Image
ASuiGeneris
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Manhattan Melodrama (1934)
Murderous Film?
First things first. Before anything else, credit is due for the fact that this cost Dillinger his life (being the film he went out to see for his favorite actress, Myrna Loy, only to be gunned down on the way out). Another credit is due for this being the very first Myrna Loy & William Powell film- as of the date of this review- Hollywood's best couple that supposedly had such romantic chemistry on set, but not in real life(?) Last but not least, another little known trivia fact is that this is the only film Clark Gable and William Powell starred in together, and they were both married to Carole Lombard at different times in real life! In other words, real life competing suitors act as two best friends that have their friendship tested by both the moral and political obligations to do the right thing and, yes, a girl- but Myrna Loy, not Carole Lombard.
Much admiration is also due for the courage to use a bittersweet ending- mostly bitter, and certainly not the expected Hollywood ending. That being said, this ending was not without its flaws. But it was William Powell, who is always charming, so might be some bias here. He prosecuted his best friend to the best of his abilities, encouraged the death penalty, and then as governor could not be "blinded by emotions" to commute his sentence?
Well, when we are talking death, an irreversible choice, "blinded by emotions" means you are human. More precisely, be would not be blinded, but understand he was letting it affect his decisions.
Sure, he did the "right thing" and got the girl, but firstly not sure I like Myrna Loy's character basically being a psychological femme fatale by trying to manipulate him and commute the sentence otherwise "I will leave you". Which is even more ironic and unbelievable, because she is essentially giving him an ultimatum with ridiculous sounding options- "choose us both, or lose us both". Then he resigns from his governorship because he "thought about" letting his emotions overrule his logic? Since when are we punished for our mere thoughts? Especially when he painfully endured the emotional toll in order to honor the terms of his political position; he throws away that position anyways? A man who would do this would need to be closer to a robot. Possible, but highly unlikely and therefore not exactly relatable.
I guess my idea of the ideal ending would have been him commuting his best friend's sentence, then maybe instead of life imprisonment, some other form of rehabilitation, and he doing the same volunteering to resign from office- in this case he would have a purpose- choosing his emotions, his humanity; closing his friendship and loyalty to loved ones over a political career. In my "ideal" ending, Myrna Loy would not have tried to guilt or manipulate him into doing anything.
Some might argue that this is simplifying it too much- that the right thing is indeed to not be affected by a friendship, because the alternative would be to support the death penalty passionately until it is somebody you know and care about; double standards for society versus your personal life.
I would actually agree with that. Like it would have been different if Clark Gable's character was a real psychopathic serial killer or even acted like someone who would most definitely kill again out of maliciousness. Might be because Clark Gable was so charming- but that is not the only thing. Bundy, Dahmer, Wayne Gacy were some famous likable and charming murderers- but based on their actions and motives and the premeditation, their crimes were far more deplorable than killing one guy for cheating him out of some money and another guy in order to prevent the downfall of his best friend's career. Bad? Definitely. Immoral? Yes. Should be locked away? Probably. For life, with no intention to allow him a chance to change? Maybe, maybe not. The death penalty? That's extreme.
Anyhow, this is only a film, so I digress. Excellent performances all around. Obviously had the power to stir up some serious thought around integrity, loyalty, morality, doing the right thing. And definite discussion points regarding the death penalty and politics, career versus personal relationships.
Bottom line, a thought provoking film, with excellent performances. And extra points for not taking the easy way out of a straightforward, fairytale ending.
Je verrai toujours vos visages (2023)
Petition For This To Be A Documentary Next Time!
I have a Bachelors in Arts in Criminology. And a double in Psychology. Not many people know this about me, because, frankly, I am embarrassed because I do not use it at all in my life. I feel like I wasted my 4 years in college and have basically no career; doing basically nothing; what could have been done with a high school diploma.
But I digress.
I only confessed it now to give some validity to my next statement, which is that this restorative program between offenders and victims needs to be a real thing. And not only in France. World wide. My studies and own personal research tells me that this is real. It works more often than it does not- maybe not in the ways people want it to, but it is real progress. Kudos to the filmmakers for such an insightful premise, and to the actors and actresses for some damn fine performances all around. Bravo!
La passion de Dodin Bouffant (2023)
The Passion of Foodies, Not Filmies
The Taste Of Things (French: La Passion de Dodin Bouffant; "The Passion of Dodin Bouffant") (2023)
Director: Anh Hung Tran
First Seen: 11/15/2024
What a grave disappointment. I like Anh Hung Tran, the director. I am a certified foodie. I adore many French films. Have always been a Binoche fan. Thus, based on everything I have read, this was supposed to be an easy winner for me. Alas, maybe having expectations was not the way to go, for barely any were met.
I applaud Babette's Feast. The Big Night was great. Chocolat, Binoche's other foodie film, was most charming. Tampopo is an all time favorite. Delicious, another French gastronomy film, was also excellent. What gives? Rather, what's cooking?
Well, only one expectation was met. Gastronomical delights. Yes, it is visually pleasing. Yes, it is first rate food porn. Yes, even the scenery is beautiful. Luscious cinematography. Yes, it can evoke "cozy vibes". One could fantasize about eating all the comfort foods depicted. But in order to actually be the cinematic equivalent of comfort food, it needs one thing for sure. A story. And "The Taste of Things" has almost nothing in the way of that. Or if the story is there, it moves along at such a glacial pace and is interrupted by food porn so frequently; the audience is so constantly distracted from it, that they will likely forget about it all together.
All the other films mentioned before have one thing in common- they are excellent food porn paired with an engaging story. Sometimes, the visual delights and audience hunger might outweigh the story in its hold on the viewers, but it is still, very clearly, there. Without the story line, with no dialogue, it would be a completely different experience. Those films, without the story, would be severely diminished in quality.
"The Taste of Things" could be watched on mute; could be watched in a foreign language with no subtitles, and the difference would be negligible. This is less of an exaggeration than it sounds. Because the best parts of this film are the scenes in the kitchen, via the first rate food porn. As far as the supposed "story", the romance is not completely believable, let alone relatable. And every time we might be beginning to take a real interest in a character arc, we are taken away or distracted by food porn. The fact that we are glad to shift to gastronomically pleasing distractions says a lot. Yes, it says that culinary students will benefit highly from this. It says this would be an A+ cooking show. But it is being sold as a film; and a film needs an engaging story to be successful. There are exceptions to this rule, of course, but "The Taste of Things" was not one of them. Audiences not so interested in food will be bored. And despite some sweet parts in the mere skeleton of a story, those gastronomically inclined will be mostly impatient to return to the sweet and savory foodcentric scenes.
Consequently, more than two long hours later, audiences will be hungry- hungry for French food, but also hungry for a story that actually has some substance on it!
To further drive my point home, there is a conversation so important that it was not only shown in the trailer, but also depicted twice in the film. The scene involves the two main characters, Dodin and Eugénie, discussing the intricacies of their relationship to each other. She talks about the seasons, the passage of time; they discuss what they mean to each other. She wants to know whether she is his wife or his cook. When he answers with the latter- his cook- it is obvious that this is the right answer, for she is pleased and expresses her gratitude.
Well, we audience members want to know whether this is a film or a cooking show. Like Dodin tells Eugénie, the answer is in the cooking- a cooking show. Unlike Eugénie, however, audiences looking for a complete film will not be pleased and will not express their gratitude.
Naked (1993)
Appalling Chaos
An utter waste of time. Worse than that, you are likely to feel worse after the traumatic two hours.
Seventh Leigh film. Fifth one that I disliked or hated. (The other two were alright too pretty good, no great films.)
I really should give it up. Me being stubborn is not going to make his films magically appeal to me.
Misogynistic, offensive, if that's the point, it should at least have characters I can relate or identify with. Performances vary from sufficient to good. Nowhere near enough to outweigh the torturous spiral of despair for no reason.
The issue is not how depressing, honest, raw his films are. This one in particular, I could not connect with any of the characters. At all. Closer to the opposite. Maybe not rooting for their downfall, but needing something to hurry and get over done with!
A Disney Holiday Short: The Boy & the Octopus (2024)
Under The Christmas Sea World
4 minutes from New Zealand's most famous director, Taika Waititi!
It will not take you much longer to watch the entire short film than it will be to read this synopsis and review, so feel free to navigate away now.
Still here? Alright. How to summarize the four minutes?
"A young boy encounters a curious octopus while snorkeling on a seaside vacation. The persistent mollusk attaches itself to the boy's head and becomes his constant companion."
Still here? You could have watched most of it already. But, alright. Here are my thought bubbles.
Feels like a commercial. For what? Christmas? Yes. Disney? Yes. Octopuses? Yes. Octopi? Yes again.
Extra points for "Part of Your World" instrumental soundtrack for the ultimate The Little Mermaid and Under The Sea vibes, plus a fish tank cameo that evokes Finding Nemo and Pixar nostalgia.
Now go watch it if you have not already!
La vendedora de rosas (1998)
Not true life, but should have been.
Here is the thing. If you are going to film something this depressing, this raw, this repetitive, this violent, then it ought to actually be true. A documentary. Why use real street kids to play other street kids? Why not make it all completely true? Why make audiences sit through such uncomfortable pain and suffering that is not even true, but only mostly, sorta, similar to true stories?
More over, we are never given the chance to really connect with our get to know these characters. Spreading themselves too thin, the filmmakers present a myriad of street children living the hard life, but only glazing the surface. They proceed to highlight a vignette of the darkest and most violent aspects of each character's turmoil, but then abruptly and disconcertingly shifting gears- moving on to another child with an equally traumatic, if slightly different, set of circumstances. Then to be told that these characters that you might feel sorry for but aren't real anyways, are played by actors and actresses that really have it hard in their real lives? Well, we want those stories! We want to know those children! Not these performances, impressive that they might be.
"The Rose Seller" is supposed to be a modern retelling of the likewise dark- probably the most disheartening fairy tale in history- Hans Christian Andersen's "The Little Match Girl". Anyone familiar with this children's story knows it starts sad, gets colder and darker, sadder and more and more discouraging, until the final sad climax of her death as she follows her loving grandmother in her dream vision.
Sadly, real life carrying on the film life, the actress who plays the main character Mónica, Leidy Tabares, was soon incarcerated following the filming for "The Rose Seller", sentenced for 26 years in prison for various charges including involvement in a taxi driver's murder. And as if to prove the point that true life is indeed more interesting than anything anyone can make up, in 2015 there was a Columbian telenovela from Sony titled, "Lady, la vendedora de rosas", where "Lady Tabares" is played by actress Natalia Reyes Gaitán. It ran successfully for 78 episodes!
Le trou (1960)
It is exactly what it sets out to be, no more, no less.
One darn good prison escape film. But that is all it is, unfortunately. We see nothing of these five characters before their respective incarcerations, and know zilch about afterwards. Indeed, play by play, step by step, a compelling guide to escaping from a French prison. It is even based on truth, with the actor playing the character Roland actually using a stage name and not an actor at all to play his own role. The five inmates portray the real life prison escape attempt in 1947 at the La Santé Prison in France.
Looking for an intriguing prison film? A revealing blueprint and gritty details that could be a how to guide for prison escape? "Le Trou" is highly recommended, then! But if the audience members want anything more than that, they would be completely out of luck.
Dood van een Schaduw (2012)
Petition For A Feature Length Version!
There have been one too many short films greatly diminished en route to a feature length film not to be at least a little hesitant in this statement. Nevertheless, any flaws in this compelling short film could be remedied by a feature length film version, done right. Some unfinished questions answered, further character development, and additional backstory- with the already impressive cinematography and ingenuous premise with such imaginative world building should only result in something most magnificent. Can it be done? Yes, but whether it will is the real issue we have, but I for one plead for an answer in the affirmative! Here is my official endorsement for the future successful films by Belgian director Tom Van Avermaet!
Momo e no tegami (2011)
Inevitable Studio Ghibli Comparisons
Hate to say what everybody else has already said, but what can you do when what everybody else has said is, ultimately, the truth?
"A Letter to Momo" had its heart in the right place and endearing characters, but was a little too long with some frivolous scenes and tangents. Editing, packing need some tailoring. In addition, while the characters were likeable enough, they were not quite completely lovable nor relatable. Most of the characters, including the goblins and mother, could have benefitted from some additional backstory and character development. The supporting characters like both leading ladies' possible love interested and the aunt and uncle likewise should have been better incorporated into the story; otherwise eliminated all together, in order to avoid gaping holes and unfinished plot threads.
Had I gone into this knowing nothing about it, I probably would have thought it was a Miyazaki, Studio Ghibli Film in the early days or a slightly offkilter one- that is to say, a relatively good film- better than most other films out there, including some more recent ones from the great Studio Ghibli (looking at you, Hedwig!). Worth watching, once!
The Lady Eve (1941)
The Not-So-Easy-To-Believe Lady Eve
Preston Sturges has given us a relatively even number of winners and flops. After some contemplation, it has been discovered that the flops were failures not because they were not entertaining or witty enough- because if nothing else, Sturges knows how to write a zesty and witty story- but because they were undeniably implausible or utterly irrational.
Call me a stickler, but I cannot stand books, films, stories where the author presents it as truth but it is so obviously implausible. There is fantasy, which is a great genre. There is realism, which is also great. There is even something in between called magical realism. But pretending to be something you are not- namely, pretending this totally makes sense when it does not- feels patronizing. It makes audience members like me feel cheated.
"The Lady Eve" did exactly this. There is no way this could even begin to evolve or transpire in real life. Any somewhat detailed synopsis already makes this clear. Supposedly two people who love each other, misunderstanding after misunderstanding, from con woman to a remorseful woman in love, then back to con woman with a revengeful streak, then back to in love woman and then somehow fairytale ending? Sound confusing? Does not make any sense? My point exactly. After discovering this woman is a member of a card shark con team once, this intelligent, wealthy ophiologist (scientist studying snakes) immediately falls for it a second time? With very little time transpiring in between, the woman reenters his life, without changing her appearance much, and he easily believes her to be exactly who she says she is, someone else entirely, even when there are red flags everywhere, not to mention his bodyguard literally telling him it is the same girl multiple times? And furthermore marries her in short succession without any second thoughts? Right.
Furthermore, neither of the leads were very likeable. Him, because he was so frustratingly, unbelievably gullible and continuously acting foolishly. Her, because she was constantly ambivalent, capricious, conniving, duplicitous, revengeful, or vindictive- more often, all of the above. Not to mention the absence of any chemistry between them.
Mister Sturges, we faithfully and respectfully admire your mastery of storytelling- even your decision to include a very charming opening credits animation sequence- but please do not treat your audiences as if we are idiots, taking for granted that we will believe whatever you tell us. Leave the incredulous storylines and plots for the fairy tales and fantasy stories, and give us something that makes some sense. We can suspend our disbeliefs, but there are limits. We have seen your other films. We therefore know how capable you are of telling an entertaining, coherent story. And there is no reason to let your talent go to waste with frivolous absurdities!
Ageman (1990)
The least best from the bestest best!
My very last Itami film.
Such a bittersweet moment, let us celebrate by remembering all ten feature films plus one short film, ranked from least awesome to most amazing awesome! According to me, that is. Do try this at home, results may vary!
Rubber Band Pistol (1962) (Short)
Tales of a Golden Geisha (1990)
A Quiet Life (1995)
The Funeral (1984)
A Taxing Woman's Return (1988)
The Last Dance (1993)
Minbo: The Art of Extortion (1992)
Woman in Witness Protection (1997)
A Taxing Woman (1987)
Supermarket Woman (1996)
Tampopo (1985)
Alas, all of us in the films aficionados club miss you oh so much.
My Old Ass (2024)
"How To Live 101"
Pleasantly surprised by this film.
I concur! It is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all.
I do not blame them because, yes, Aubrey Plaza is that awesome that the fifteenish minutes of scenes- shared with Stella- are enough to make it advertisement material for fifty percent of the trailers, but I still feel deceived. Although her voice is distinct and so that should count for something; the conversations with no Aubrey face, only Aubrey voice. Still. Audiences should be warned:
Aubrey Plaza is in this for only about fifteen minutes!
How do you showcase a character, an actress, whose best attribute is actually singing? Add Bieber + Mushrooms, no matter that the scene is glaringly out of place, obviously. The deus ex machina equivalent!
Only saying. Because it is worth it anyways- the musically gifted Stella in her debut film is pretty damn good.
The Miracle of Morgan's Creek (1943)
So bad, but so good.
Alas, one of my least favorite subcategory of films. I do not refer to any genre, but the type of films that are so good in some ways and so bad in others- making it quite difficult to grade. "The Miracle of Morgan's Creek" started out with so much promise. Then it quickly became increasingly absurd and fanciful. From silly funny to unbelievable but still good, to being so completely outlandish that nothing could be taken seriously. But I guess that was the goal?
The "mood " of the film is supposed to be funny and feel good- but more than that, it is a frenzied, close to manic environment and pace that, frankly, can cause some anxiety! All of the characters are played so over the top, implausible characters. Norval started out as an endearing nice guy, but as each scene went by where he did absolutely ridiculously, cluelessly, stupid things, it became unbelievable and no longer endearing. The main characters are the Kockenlockers, which yes, I am sure was so much fun to say so the time. The father and her sister Emmy were both loud and everything they did was with such exaggeration. The father is the character that probably developed the most, from super strict domineering father to a more doting out of love and understanding one. Trudy started out as a selfish, superficial person, but did eventually come around to realize that Norval, always right there for her, was a great guy who deserved her love. However, this change was sudden and came with no explanation. He said some things, the next thing we know, she suddenly realizes that she loves him.
The plot is absurd right from the beginning and only gets more and more inconceivable. The female protagonist, Trudy, not remembering who she married, but "sure" she did, without much more to go on but fuzzy memories. The human brain is quite fallible even in the best of times, without amnesia! And then she decides to fake a marriage with Norval so she can have the marriage certificate to avoid a scandal in the town? Then he accidentally signs his real name, when he was supposed to be posing as a soldier? Then he is arrested for impersonation and abducting Trudy, but then her father, the town constable, lets him escape- actually has to literally push him into escaping in one of the most frustrating scenes ever with Norval not being able to understand anything the father is suggesting because he is so "good", such a nice, morally superior boy.
The ridiculousness does not end there. Norval needs some money, because he plans to find the original soldier, whom we don't even know really even exists but for the pregnancy, a ring on her hand, and her vague recollection that she was with a soldier that had a "Z" in his name. Considering that the party at which she supposedly met this mystery husband was also attended by dozens of other soldiers, it is possible it could have been any one of them, or even somebody not attending the party that she ran into later, since she does not remember anything else. Furthermore, it is completely possible that they slept together but never actually married.
Anyhow, to get this said money to aid in his escape, they stage a bank robbery, which Norval happens to work at. Because of course that would be smarter than quietly finding a way to borrowing some money or getting the money after hours. Obviously, he messes it up and the bank alarm blares into the night. More shenanigans ensue, the father- remember he is the constable that was supposed to be guarding Norval- is fired, and he goes into hiding with his two daughters. Fast forward a few months, Norval has returned, with no success on locating the mysterious man that may or may not exist. And of course, he is seen by the bank manager, and he is arrested again.
By this time, Trudy is ready to give birth. And here is where we learn what the titular "Miracle* is that occurs in this town called "Morgan's Creek". She- gasp- gives birth to sextuplets, and they are all boys. And we still are not done. Next comes a montage, which I guess is supposed to be very humorous, where everyone around the world, from Mussolini to Hitler to great leaders continents away in Asia, all express their awe. Indeed, this is such an unbelievable miracle that a "recount" is demanded. Cue several more punny newspaper headlines! And such is the inspiring nature of this miracle that the governor of the state and local leaders decide that all is forgiven! Trudy's first marriage, which we don't even know really occurred without a paper trail, is inexplicably annulled anyhow. And even though he gave the court a fake name, Norval and Trudy are decidedly now officially married. The governor makes Norval a state guard, even though he was refused service in the army in all his previous applications. Last but not least, the father is not only rehired, but also given a promotion!
Finally, we have the icing on this unbalanced, overflowing with ingredients fancy cake- Norval is released from his cell, and chased by a clamoring crowd of nosy citizens, governmental figures, and newspaper reporters with their paparazzi- he is reunited with a resting Trudy, who doesn't even know what she has given birth to. She asks Norval whether it was a boy or girl. Norval is led by sister Emmy to see his babies- remember, not his, but he has so nobly agreed to raise as his own- and finds out it is not one, but six babies! We proceed with the necessary dramatics, fainting and screaming, be even tried to run away. And then, a saving grace maybe, but completely abrupt- given the film has taken more than 1.5 hours to get this far- the scene ends. Nay, not only the scene, but the entire film. Title card reads:
"But Norval recovered and
became increasingly happy
for, as Shakespeare said:
"Some are born great, some
achieve greatness, and some
have greatness thrust upon
them."
It is like the cast and film crew were having such a great time, lost track of time, and suddenly realized they had to end the film, so why not throw in an intertitle to finish it all. Hooray?
Given all this, it is more than generous to give this film 6/10 stars. After all, one is unlikely to report boredom. Maybe annoyance and frustration, but as long as the audience is prepared for this, and you are a viewer that is fine with fantastical plots, over the top theatrics with an uneven pace, and an abrupt conclusion that seems very lazy- literally using a title card to replace what should have been at least several more scenes- then this could actually be described as fun. As long as you do not find verisimilitude a necessary component of the story, "The Miracle of Morgan's Creek" is rather entertaining, with many funny moments and a cute if not very plausible story. As is expected from the talented Preston Sturges, there is clever dialogue, engaging repartee, and some slapstick humor. The most grievous flaw, ironically, is that one can recognize the potential in this film that could have easily been better in so many ways.
Ten Inch Hero (2007)
Ten Stars For Ten Inch Hero. You knew that had to be said.
Ten Inch Hero (2007)
Director: David Mackay
First Seen: 11/8/2024
I have always maintained that contrary to what seems to be the norm- that people write reviews most often for the very best of the very worst of whatever they are reviewing- the best films are actually much more difficult to write reviews for. They are so good, I am afraid that anything I write will undersell its greatness; words cannot express how amazing some things are. "Ten Inch Hero", a hidden gem of a film, is one of these things.
Anyone who has read my other reviews would know that they are typically rather detailed, on the precise side, one might even say "academic", but this was so good that instead I am going to squeal like a little girl and leave it pretty sparse.
It is soooooooo good. You have to see it, I will not tell you, cannot tell you why, except that it covers so many important things about life and living and love and character and what we all are on the earth for. There are basically 5 different storylines with equal weight. By the middle of the film, I was thinking this was pretty good, an 8/10. As each of the five stories were wrapped up, one by one- notably, not all exactly fairytale endings, a couple even with twists and poetic endings- it became a 9/10, and then finally I gave up and knew I had to give it an oh so rare 10/10, which to me means not perfect because there is no such thing, but so good that we are willing to overlook any flaws.
That is all I have to say. Go watch it. Experience this greatness of a story. Stories.
I cannot believe this is not more well known. My guess is because the title is not exactly an attention grabbing or marketable one. In fact, it makes it seem like another lame teen dramedy. Plus the fact that any synopsis I have seen for it is so vague and in no way even begins to describe how good it is. "Four friends that work in a sandwich shop on the beach search for love". Umm, no. So much more than that.
Watch it. You won't regret it. If you disagree strongly, we probably would not be great friends.
Philadelphia (1993)
Oh, On The Streets of Philadelphia!
Philadelphia. An ode to human rights, a message as heartwarming as it is important. We should never tire of excellent films that remind us that when all is said and done, we are all the same. Humans who need acceptance and love for who we are, full stop. The details are but forgettable minutiae. The sadly honest depiction of homophobia will remind audiences of this.
Opening and closing montages deserve a special mention, because it is rare for such long ones to actually enhance rather than diminish the film quality. Anyone having lived in Philadelphia will be especially pleased with the film's treatment of the city. The magnificent sights and sounds around The City of Brotherly Love will no doubt evoke nostalgia for those who have been there or even lived there, and inspire those who have not to do so.
As for possible improvements? Far too many zoom in close shots. When we actually notice it several times, it becomes distracting. A tad too much reliance on intertitle to convey the passage of time. It is great that it does not give audiences the "Hollywood timeline" where court cases proceed within days or weeks- in the real world, the legal system does indeed take its sweet time. Still, there are many other and better ways to show- not write in words- the passage of these seemingly interminable years. Last but not least, audiences will wish there was more story outside the courtroom. The fault of the masterful filmmakers, we care about these people. Compelling courtroom monologues and performances notwithstanding, tell us more about them in the real world, behind closed doors, outside the courtroom!
Other than that, two exemplary performances from two double winning Academy Awards Winning actors, doing what they do best. The caliber does not get much better than this. There isn't much else to complain about in this significant and winning legal drama for not only the AIDS warriors and survivors and the LGBT community, but pretty much everyone.
Gomudeppô (1962)
The Odd One Out of Outstanding Oeurve
Strangely, this actually reminded me of early Cassavetes. Maybe the combination of black and white and mostly plotless storyline with interesting dialogue amongst a group of friends.
One thing is for certain, this definitely is not like his feature films. Completely different mood, obvious budget and talent improvements in his later works. Fans of Itami will have a difficult time recognizing this short film as one of his. Personally, I would have been convinced this was an Ozu or MIzoguchi before Itami, with his signature flair, music, and consistent use of his muses- most notably his wife. Compared side by side with his ten feature films, "Rubber Band Pistol" is like the "Which one of these is not like the others?" answer in his filmography. And not only because it is the only short. Length consideration aside, this is undeniably different.
Different is not necessarily a negative thing, but in this case, with Itami's ouerve being so iconic, impressive, insightful, and intriguing, it does make this short film a disappointment and nowhere near as engaging or fun. But a lesser Itami is still better than many other films that make much more in the box office. A simple story, if one can even call it that- a group of friends living life, nothing more, nothing less. Like people watching, it is occasionally interesting, will evoke laughter and nostalgia for some, but mostly forgettable and mundane.
This is certainly not a good place to start for virgin viewers, as it is not representative of what would become Itami's signature style. But, an entertaining enough watch for completists going through the director's ouerve- an informative piece for comparison in demonstrating how far he came as an auteur filmmaker. Also of note is the fact that although he did take on many minor acting roles in other films over the years, this is the only time he acted in something he also wrote and directed.
Amanda (2022)
Oh, Amanda.
Quirky whimsy, but aside from a few laughs and interesting storytelling choices, there was not enough heart. Plotless. Amanda might have Borderline Personality Disorder, she tries to force a friendship with a similarly but differently neurodivergent girl, while also trying to secure her first boyfriend. Surreal scenes, quirky little things like having her AI address her as "Sexy Mamma", her irregular friendship with the housemaid, and a horse she connects with better than humans, some witty dialogue. This is no spoiler except to say that there is nothing to spoil. Because the synopsis is all that it is. By the end, we are still unsure whether Amanda has finally found a new friend; everything is too unstable and surreal to say for sure.
This is Carolina Cavalli's directorial debut. The potential is here; her talent is evident. Her other contribution was as co-writer-but not as co-director- on "Fremont", which was significantly more engaging and successful. Anticipating Cavalli's sophomore directorial effort, here is to looking forward to her directing skills matching her writing caliber!
De battre mon coeur s'est arrêté (2005)
Eh. The heart couldn't even be affected.
What a disappointment! This is the fourth Audiard film for me, but have yet to find one that is great; so far it ranges from mediocre to good only. This time around, another subpar film experience. A remake this time; maybe should have done what I usually do, insist on seeing the original first. Alas, this French adaptation received slightly higher critical acclaim than it's American counterpart.
Basically, young guy is mixed up in the criminal world, shady deals; usually violence is involved to secure more money and more power. He was born into this world, his father's would, anyways. One day, he is reminded that he also once had a mother with a passion other than this- music.
Nature versus Nurture? Father versus Mother? Which is which? Whose career and livelihood does he desire to emulate? Will he be able to turn this desire into reality? Will music save him from a life in crime? Well, somebody wise said that you can change what you do, but you cannot change who you are.
He begins lessons with a Vietnamese girl who also speaks Chinese, but not French, so with no comprehended conversation, they spend time with each other. His piano playing improves. Some shady deal his father is involved with goes south. He tries to warn his father that the Russian dude he is dealing with is a real bad guy, like murder, obviously a whole different level in "bad". Father wants the money the Russian owes him, though, unfortunately, and it costs him his life.
All this took a while; honestly, very difficult to feel anything, even pity or vexation. Any vexation could not be wasted on this minimally developed characters; if anything, there was vexation directed at our director, Audiard! This vexation is most pronounced with about ten minutes left in the film. Protagonist has found his father dead; he was not able to save him. Black. Title card. "2 years later". Aggravating ellipse.
Apparently two years later, he is now in some sort of relationship with the Asian piano tutor, likely her manager, as evidenced by his conversations with theater personnel and the loving looks and touches that they share. How did we get here? The important and probably far more interesting events that led to these two individuals becoming romantically involved are left to the audience's imagination. As if we did not already feel disconnected enough from the characters, we are now given an inexplicable turn in emotions and events. This is the present, and we have no choice but to accept it. They were not together, now they are. And then, by chance, he runs into the Russian who was responsible for his father's death while taking his lover to a concert. He follows the man, seeking revenge.
Alas, try as he might, gun cocked and directed into this man's throat, he cannot pull the trigger. After some struggle; we can imagine this as the nature versus nurture, father versus mother battle- or is it the other way around? Honestly, at this point, we do not care enough. Woo hoo, he does not kill him, hooray, he is not a murderer, only a real estate agent with questionable integrity and little empathy for all the immigrant or former residents that he forces into homelessness and often extorts for money. He returns to the concert hall, successfully avoiding a murder charge, and watches his love interest play on stage. Yay.
Le quattro volte (2010)
Slow Attenborough?
I disagree with the comparisons to Au Hasard Balthazar. They were both about a four legged farm animal and considered to be "slow cinema" with some gorgeous cinematography. The similarities end there. This is more accurately akin to an especially show nature documentary, not a slower than average animal story like Bella Tarr's works.
I hardly ever multitask when watching films, because I feel it takes away from focus and therefore a fair assessment. I also commit to finishing what I start whenever possible. Despite watching to the end many titles that I disliked, this was in a completely other league.
There are offensive or straight up stupid films that I grudgingly finish. There are the boring or gratuitously weird films that I eventually get through by only watching a little at a time.
Then there are films like this. Nothing overtly negative about it. In fact, if it were about a quarter of the length, it would probably be great. But at a torturous almost 90 minutes, it was not great or even good. It was a bore that had me multitasking and silently wishing I had watched something like "Gigli" instead! Even though my rating for this will be higher than "Gigli", because I can recognize the technical achievement, I would never choose to watch it again.
Audience members would be well served going into this with the right expectations. If you want to show something this raw, this slow, this uneventful, it ought to be all real, without the attempt at giving us a narrative getting in the way. Nature documentaries, like those which Sir David Attenborough has magnificently exemplified time and time again and mastered. At the very least, going into this with a frame of mind suitable for something this serene and more didactic than necessarily fun or interesting- not expecting a captivating story- would no doubt elicit much more positive audience reactions.
Eight (2016)
An Eight For Eight. Ha.
I cannot rate this higher because it is the most accurate and therefore opposite of fun and entertaining thing I have seen in recent memory.
Anyone who watches this with significantly negative feedback obviously does not have anxiety or OCD. It is boring to watch for those who cannot relate; maybe even seem overdone. I assure you, it is not. If anything, for the most serious cases, it censors the most embarrassing types of compulsions, obsessions, and rituals. For me, being one that can sadly relate, this was extremely difficult to watch because it was quite triggering, making me think about my own obsessions and rituals. So maybe even as a little ERP (Exposure Response Prevention), I had to watch this in little short bits over time, otherwise I would be flooded with anxiety I could not cope with. Am I ashamed to admit how pathetic this is? Yes. Have I done, do I continue do, many illogical compulsions and rituals every damn hour of every day that are far more embarrassing, that I am not admitting to my own consciousness, to my friends, let alone in a public forum? Yes, yes, and yes.
If this seems campy or weirdly horror like, that is because it is. I promise you that the darkest things our brains can do in real life are far more frightening than any made up horror film.
I do not have the cleaning subtype, but this is scarily accurate, in so far as the desperation, the madness you feel knowing what you are doing is madness, the utter panic; the fact that anyone else watching you would likely think some very unkind things about you, when all you are is a girl with a unbelievably powerful mental disorder that will not go away. No matter what you do. Indeed, the more you forcefully try to make it go away, the more serious it actually becomes, to "make up" for any deficiencies.
And how alone you inevitably are, you and your disorder. Because you might have many loved ones who want with all their hearts to save you; to rescue you from this pain, but there is little they can do when your OCD rules your every thought and what feels like every cell in your body. You can try to let in love for others, you can accept love, but at the end of the day, you know who you are really married to for life.
So you do the only thing you can, when suicide is not an option. You continue pushing through another second, another minute, another hour, another day, another year.
And the ending was unfortunately the most relatable thing of all. Because your one victory is equivalent to everyone else's, well, breathing. And about a thousand times easier to lose than it is the win. Because the thoughts don't go away, and despite the many victories you thought you had. Then, suddenly, it is ten years later, twenty years later, you are still alive, but you don't know how, and it's all been a nightmare. And you are still in it. Stuck. No way out. The credits might roll, but for us sufferers, the horror continues. Relentlessly.
#0CD #mentalhealth #mentalhealthawareness.
Holiday (1938)
Two Versions, One Message
A one location film (The Seaton's Grand Estate), "Holiday" (1930) and "Holiday" (1938) are based on the 1928 play of the same name by Philip Barry. It is difficult to compare the two, because although they both follow the original play very closely and therefore can be loosely matched line for line for much of the runtime, their storytelling approaches are quite different.
Edward Griffith's 1930 version is a slower paced, more austere telling, with subtle nuances and more subdued performances. One could almost call it a more peaceful ride, as the leading characters love to call their adventures in life. George Cukor's version 8 years later with much higher ticket stars does add much humor and vigor. This is not to say that Griffith's version is not funny or playful, because it is. Cukor's 1938 adaptation is simply more ostentatious and maybe pretentious. This is due mainly to Katherine Hepburn's performance. Like all the characters she plays, her acting always seems too unnaturally forceful and often overdone. Cary Grant fans will not be disappointed, however, and the Potters- with Edward Horton reprising his role from the 1930 version- are better this time around. Likely because, in one of the few differences, the couple is working class rather than wealthy socialites- making the characters far more lovable and their scenes that much more entertaining without the slight prudishness of the haughty rich.
Therefore, forced to recommend one over the other, the updated 1938 version starring the popular Hollywood pairing with Grant & Hepburn is given the slight edge. With its more humorous and faster paced interpretation. Not only a slight one. It is highly recommended that audiences watch both versions to decide for themselves- on account of the fact that sometimes we actually need to turn in down a notch and appreciate more subtle and subdued performances.
Ironic how this entire "Holiday" takes place in one place. A stately mansion, no less. The ultimate staycation? In all seriousness, whichever version (preferably both) audiences choose, the general message and story are the same, and Philip Barry's narrative, with both insightful and witty dialogue, is an entertaining way to tell it. Well, what is that oh so important and very true message? Be true to ourselves, for compromising can only go so far in personal relationships before it becomes inadvisedly harmful, and money isn't everything in life- you can't take it with you!
Holiday (1930)
Two Adaptations, One Takeaway
A one location film (The Seaton's Grand Estate), "Holiday" (1930) and "Holiday" (1938) are based on the 1928 play of the same name by Philip Barry. It is difficult to compare the two, because although they both follow the original play very closely and therefore can be loosely matched line for line for much of the runtime, their storytelling approaches are quite different.
Edward Griffith's 1930 version is a slower paced, more austere telling, with subtle nuances and more subdued performances. One could almost call it a more peaceful ride, as the leading characters love to call their adventures in life. George Cukor's version 8 years later with much higher ticket stars does add much humor and vigor. This is not to say that Griffith's version is not funny or playful, because it is. Cukor's 1938 adaptation is simply more ostentatious and maybe pretentious. This is due mainly to Katherine Hepburn's performance. Like all the characters she plays, her acting always seems too unnaturally forceful and often overdone. Cary Grant fans will not be disappointed, however, and the Potters- with Edward Horton reprising his role from the 1930 version- are better this time around. Likely because, in one of the few differences, the couple is working class rather than wealthy socialites- making the characters far more lovable and their scenes that much more entertaining without the slight prudishness of the haughty rich.
Therefore, forced to recommend one over the other, the updated 1938 version starring the popular Hollywood pairing with Grant & Hepburn is given the slight edge. With its more humorous and faster paced interpretation. Not only a slight one. It is highly recommended that audiences watch both versions to decide for themselves- on account of the fact that sometimes we actually need to turn it down a notch and appreciate more subtle and subdued performances.
Ironic how this entire "Holiday" takes place in one place. A stately mansion, no less. The ultimate staycation, maybe? In all seriousness, whichever version (preferably both) audiences choose, the general message and story are the same, and Philip Barry's narrative, with both insightful and witty dialogue, is an entertaining way to tell it. Well, what is that oh so important and very true message? Be true to ourselves, for compromising can only go so far in personal relationships before it becomes inadvisedly harmful, and money isn't everything in life- you can't take it with you!
Moonbird (1959)
Their sons should feel honored that their parents honored them in such a creative way!
Moonbird (1959), The Hole (1962), & A Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass Double Feature (1966), the married director duo John and Faith Hubley's three Academy Award Best Animated Short winners, are very similar in intention and execution.
They are all unscripted- a conversation between their two children, an improvised conversation, and two already established songs, respectively. In this sense, the animation was an afterthought; secondary and (at least initially) separate from the source. The animation style is simple; childlike and rudimentary looking, flat and two dimensional. By no means is this type of animation inferior to more technologically advanced three dimensional styles; when used effectively, it can be as good or even better. Last but not least, music plays an important role in each short.
The first two shorts make it painfully evident that this is not the most advisable or easiest modus operandi to find source material for an animated short. The third shows us that it is possible, however, to make it work when done correctly!
"Moonbird", as mentioned, is a conversation between two young boys. The directors secretly recorded their sons, Mark and Ray, as they told each other stories before bedtime, as many young children are likely to do. This particular occasion was about something they called a "Moonbird", that was supposedly following them around, and their attempts to capture or otherwise trap it. The brothers imagine crawling out their window into the night on this very important quest. For whatever reason, this is the conversation their parents decided would work as the base for their short animation film. What a sweet way to honor and memorialize their sons' childhood years! Unfortunately, like a stream of consciousness, the nonlinear thoughts and things said that likely made sense only to the speaker resulted in a confusing, uninteresting narrative. One can hardly be surprised, as the animation was made to order- it was created to match their sons' story and not the other way around!
"The Hole" features Dizzy Gillespie and George Mathews as two construction workers at work in the bottom of a hole on a construction site discussing nuclear war. That is the premise, anyhow. Turns out to be uncompelling nonsense regarding the possibility for nuclear war and the surrounding anxieties and fears. The voice over does not really match or flow smoothly with the animation.
This husband and wife team's final Academy Awards winner was, by far, the most successful of the three. It is no coincidence that it is also the shortest by far, at only a few seconds over the 5 minutes mark- and actually a "double feature", telling two separate stories! Essentially a narrative music video, using songs from the Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass album "Going Places", it features two catchy and mellifluous numbers: "Spanish Flea" and "Tijuana Taxi". Maybe in order to keep up the pace with the festive brass band numbers, this short was funny, quick, and avoided all the pitfalls in "Moonbird" and "The Hole"- namely an arbitrary plot, insipid dialogue, and unnecessary length.
All in all, this talented duo won three Academy Awards for their shorts that may not have been deserved every time, but there is little doubt that the Hubleys were innovative pioneers in animation.
The Hole (1962)
Academy Awards x3
Moonbird (1959), The Hole (1962), & A Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass Double Feature (1966), the married director duo John and Faith Hubley's three Academy Award Best Animated Short winners, are very similar in intention and execution.
They are all unscripted- a conversation between their two children, an improvised conversation, and two already established songs, respectively. In this sense, the animation was an afterthought; secondary and (at least initially) separate from the source. The animation style is simple; childlike and rudimentary looking, flat and two dimensional. By no means is this type of animation inferior to more technologically advanced three dimensional styles; when used effectively, it can be as good or even better. Last but not least, music plays an important role in each short.
The first two shorts make it painfully evident that this is not the most advisable or easiest modus operandi to find source material for an animated short. The third shows us that it is possible, however, to make it work when done correctly!
"Moonbird", as mentioned, is a conversation between two young boys. The directors secretly recorded their sons, Mark and Ray, as they told each other stories before bedtime, as many young children are likely to do. This particular occasion was about something they called a "Moonbird", that was supposedly following them around, and their attempts to capture or otherwise trap it. The brothers imagine crawling out their window into the night on this very important quest. For whatever reason, this is the conversation their parents decided would work as the base for their short animation film. Unfortunately, like a stream of consciousness, the nonlinear thoughts and things said that likely made sense only to the speaker resulted in a confusing, uninteresting narrative. One can hardly be surprised, as the animation was made to order- it was created to match their sons' story and not the other way around!
"The Hole" features Dizzy Gillespie and George Mathews as two construction workers at work in the bottom of a hole on a construction site discussing nuclear war. That is the premise, anyhow. Turns out to be uncompelling nonsense regarding the possibility for nuclear war and the surrounding anxieties and fears. The voice over does not really match or flow smoothly with the animation.
This husband and wife team's final Academy Awards winner was, by far, the most successful of the three. It is no coincidence that it is also the shortest by far, at only a few seconds over the 5 minutes mark- and actually a "double feature", telling two separate stories! Essentially a narrative music video, using songs from the Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass album "Going Places", it features two catchy and mellifluous numbers: "Spanish Flea" and "Tijuana Taxi". Maybe in order to keep up the pace with the festive brass band numbers, this short was funny, quick, and avoided all the pitfalls in "Moonbird" and "The Hole"- namely an arbitrary plot, insipid dialogue, and unnecessary length.
All in all, this talented duo won three Academy Awards for their shorts that may not have been deserved every time, but there is little doubt that the Hubleys were innovative pioneers in animation.
Pollyanna (1960)
Bathed, not soaked, in saccharine.
Oh, Pollyanna. The origin of an entire brand of optimism! "The Glad Game"; spreading cheer and single handedly revolutionizing an entire town for the smilier?
Honestly, this Disney interpretation of the story is not quite as bad as that sounds. Meaning not drenched in syrupy, irresponsibly, implausible optimism- only bathed in it. There were certainly some moments of realism and a few times where our titular character admitted something other than positivity. And there is a cast of memorably endearing supporting characters. Aunt Polly was not very convincing or relatable, but she is as close to a villain as Disney would make this time anyways. The maids were the most relatable characters, and added some much needed laughter. The reverend was a little too theatrical. The doctor and mayor were satisfactory but we never really got to know them. Pendergast and Snow- two main town citizens that Pollyanna transformed- were archetypal, but done with enough humor and wit to overlook this. Her only friend her own age was that loyal buddy that you always accidentally forget about.
Although Hayley Mills gives audiences a deservedly winning performance in the title role, her character was exasperatingly, well, Pollyannish!