Elijah_T

"Do you really wanna know?"

This is a movie for allies and females in general. Like Hustlers (2019), but in a whole'nother way, I feel like it needs to be watched. Partially because of how interesting it is and mostly because of how important it is. Bombshell does a great job of balancing many topics focusing on a central theme-women's issues in the workplace. Most are smoothly handled over time (like warming up buttered bread) while others are blatantly laid out (like deep frying meat) as if to avoid anyone missing the point of it all. But like any fry cook can tell you, dat meat gon' come out just right.

While the 4th wall breaking presentation of matters effectively (and damn near stylishly) blurred the line of documentary and drama/thriller, I must say it worked well, especially with how long the movie went without.

The reason why I say this is for allies is partially because of the reviews I read on Letterboxd beforehand and mostly because a female I saw the movie with called its entirety "nothing new."

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

Things I Like:

1) Dem cosmetics

2) How uncomfortable a certain scene made me

3) When she confides

4) When he allies

5) How I started seriously questioning what was going on in that building

6) When the justifications begin

7) When things get partisan

8) When they reveal

9) Da vending machine scene

Things I Love:

1) When he tells it like it is

2) How unnoticeably silent dat score is (until it isn't)

3) How many secrets are revealed/insinuated through body language

4) When she tells it like it is

Notable Things:

1) Her crew

2) Les silent eyes of the standing suits

3) Da looks

4) When they pull out the walker

5) Why she can't get a job

6) How Jobs Matter™ started squeezing in

7) La Black Room

8) Everything about dat end scene (bruh)

Favorite Line:

"I thrive in toxic environments."

Favorite Character:

The lesbian liberal. For her self and the things she got across.

Comment:

There's something very depressing and "somewhat" infuriating about the thought of this kind of crap being common in the workplace. Instead of getting too controversial, I'mma just say one thing. If you treat people poorly enough long enough, it's only just for it to bite you in some way. The unfortunate part is that bystanders will probably get caught in the crossfire.

Question:

I'm wondering. Would this story be atleast moderately different if the perspectives weren't of European descent? This question comes to mind because of two things:

1) A conversation I had with a sista during a group discussion about This Changes Everything (2018). She explained to me that the documentary was mostly about "White women."

2) Queering the Script's (2019) conversations on the lack of non-European-American LGBTQ+ representation in television and web series. This topic was also briefly brought up during the post-Q&A with Stephanie Ouaknine (producer). For some reason, almost no one wanted to be on record saying why it was the case.

Disclosure:

I attended the 30min cast Q&A "The Conversation - Live Simulcast Q&A with Charlize Theron & John Lithgow" immediately before seeing the movie, so I appreciated the portrayals and cosmetics far more than I probably would have otherwise.

Also, as previously mentioned, I watched and discussed the movie with a female.

Mini Review:

Well, this is an odd one. I'm digging the track's way of speaking for the film with its harshness and... anticipatoriness. Visually, it was a tee shocking, a bit uncomfortable, and then just funny. Couldn't help but put myself in the characters' shoes throughout it. You'll see why if you watch it. Totally a dude movie, but not in the way one might expect. NSFW, btw.

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

Director's Statement:

"The framing of traditionally macho scenarios in a homoerotic context takes its cues from the covert porn of Bob Mizer. With his films in mind, I wanted to make something arousing that could be disguised as a morality tale about the impudence of 'manspreading' in locker rooms. The combination of muscle and beat-up lockers somehow evoked the music in my mind." -Peter Strickland (La Biennale di Venezia)

Comment:

I've never heard the director's use of the term "manspreading", so that was interesting to see portrayed on-screen. I think I'd just call it trying/punking someone or testing their boundaries. 'Eh, it's blatantly disrespectful as portrayed here regardless.

About the Director:

The dude directed The Duke of Burgundy (2014), In Fabric (2018), and a short in The Field Guide to Evil (2018). The first of which I've been planning to watch (at some point) because one of my movie peeps loves it so much. The second I was gonna watch instead of The Lighthouse (2019) during their last week in theatres because it seems my cup of tea and so few people have seen in in comparison to the latter. I chose rest instead. The third I'm interested in overall and could've seen at the Alamo Drafthouse last year but skipped for reasons I don't even recall. I know next to nothing else about him, but everything previously stated is all I need to know to keep looking forward to his work.

A quiet series of seamless long takes and tracking shots of a couple's unhealthy relationship and state in life. This is a hell of a character-driven film to just watch alone. A lot is said without words, though, so there's quite a bit to take in from (probably) every scene. By the end, I felt like I knew the two characters on a deeper level than expected.

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

Things I Like:

1) Da tension

2) How both partners are hiding things

3) Da cinematography

4) Dat sex scene

5) Da hug

6) How much sense the opening scene makes by the end

7) The end credits songs

Side Notes:

There's a scene in which something is casually revealed to the audience. All I'll say about it is that I played it back after it ended and was left wondering how common it is.

The last third of this film is a trip, and I don't get the ending.

To my surprise, it's on Amazon Prime (sub). Again, totally not sponsoring anybody. Just happened to notice while going through my process.

Slight Spoilers From Here On:

Honestly, I feel bad for him. She seems to have some degree of issues that a therapist could help resolve while he has problems and no one to hold him.

Considering what happens with the one who helped her after the incident and bothered to wait for her to finish, I'm going to conclude that she's the type of person that simply cannot be in a healthy relationship for whatever reason (relevant School of Life: "Why Nice People Are Scary").

This film has one of the best sex scenes I've seen. Fully captured. Unapologetic. And with a degree of realism. Dat aftermath, tho. 👌

Favorite Line:

"I'll try to change."

"I love seeing Afro-Americans doing Black things, doing them freely, and doing them well. For that reason, I loved watching this film when they were on screen. When they weren't, I just enjoyed it. That's not to say that the non-Black story wasn't interesting. I was just too fixated on the music, dancin', and unapologetically casual Blackness of one side to look forward to the non-romantic parts of the White." -MUBI review

Beyond that, I'll say that I appreciate the degree of realness regarding the racial matters. I don't know how everyone else in the theatre felt seeing the portrayals of treatment, casual racism, paper bags, and "passing", but I enjoyed the movie more because of it.

Y'all, I just remembered dat ending. The way it all comes together and just... bruh. Lemme stop (before this turns into a full review) and say "The Cotton Club will always be with you" is how I took it.

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

Side Notes: To understand the significance of the Encore version, read Vanity Fair's "Francis Ford Coppola Rights a Wrong by Restoring Black Scenes to The Cotton Club" article. If you're curious, here's the 19-minute NYFF 2019 Q&A with Francis Ford Coppola, Maurice Hines, and James Remar. I don't recall either having any spoilers.

It's on MUBI for 30 days (as of 12/13th), btw. I provide a 30-day trial in the blog post. I swear this isn't sponsored or anything, I just got a bit excited when I saw it added to MUBI this morning and felt like I had to say something since I never got around to it during its original theatrical release in October.

For the record, I haven't rewatched the film since then and didn't take any notes, so this mini review is mostly about how I remember feeling. For that reason, I'm not giving it an official star rating on my blog. It's a 5/5 on Letterboxd, though.

I haven't seen the original and don't plan to for reasons addressed in VF's article.

"I just want to tell the story of two characters I'm interested in." -Pawel Pawlikowski (director)

I only saw this film because one of my movie peeps "highly encouraged" me... and promised to refund my ticket if I didn't like it, which I assumed I wouldn't. I liked it. Since I gave it a 4.5/5 on Letterboxd, I'll just give it a 9/10 officially.

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

There be slight spoilers below.

Cold War was an interesting story of two totally appropriately aged lovers who couldn't make it work long enough to avoid drama and sabotage. It was essentially an adult version of Romeo and Juliet, but with more realism, adult matters, and wartime politics. I feel more sorry for him than her, but that may be due to the film focusing almost entirely on his perspective and me sharing his demographic.

All of that being said, I really enjoyed the first half's performances prior to the forced politicization into propaganda. Up until that point, they had so much soul in their performances and love for what they were doing. I felt like I was being allowed to bear witness to people's cultures and appreciated it every time. Once the propaganda bulged in, it all became hollow and they themselves became smiling husks. Props to the film crew for accomplishing this. I'm now wondering how accurate that part of the film is to what was going on at the time.

If you think Cold War is about the performances, fear not. They're just a major part of the first half in that the plot is centered around them in a non-overwhelming way. The second half is... let's say a story about a male making his way through life and being occasionally visited by the ghosts of his past in rather life-altering ways. No, it's not magical. Just realistic in the way people and decisions affect your life. Smaller-form performances persists throughout the second half, mind you. That reminds me, the performances are consistently used to portray the mood and feelings of the characters. I'm especially thinking of the last performance in this regard... ~and I'll leave it there.

Things I Like:

1) Dat cinematography

1a) Lemme rave real quick about how much that reflection scene got me in the first half. To pull that simple trick so subtly and at the same time not only foreshadow but allow the audience to presume so much. 👌

2) Da performances

Side Notes:

I highly recommend watching the behind the scenes videos such as Amazon Studios' "Featurette" after the film because of how much more I'm starting to appreciate it. I say "after" because realizing that I was seeing it in color after all these months hit me in an strange way and I suspect doing so beforehand would have affected my experience.

I don't recall what song was playing during the end credits, but I remember staying seated the entire time.

Favorite Line:

"He mistook me for my mother so I used a knife to show him the difference." -Zula

Favorite Character:

Zula (when she's not being drama). For her spunkiness.

About the Trailers (1 & 2):

Y'all, I love it when a trailer manages to show so much and reveal so little. All I'll say is that it effectively covered, say, 50% of major moments but having done so without context revealed next to nothing to the viewer. That being said, if you want to skip the slightest of spoilers, skip 1:28-1:30 and 1:40-1:44 of the first trailer and 1:26-1:32 of the second. Enjoy.

Similarities:

The Fire (2015). For how I feel worse for him than her.

Disclosure:

I saw and discussed it with a group in February, so my opinion's been affected by them and my memory of the film is lacking.

"The only film in competition from Sundance that doesn't have US distribution." -Patrick Bresnan (director)

When it comes to capturing moments in the daily lives of select people in a community during a key period of their teenage years, this is a great fly on the wall documentary. It shows a reasonably well-rounded view of lower-/working-class Afro and Latinx rural America. A view that one would find difficult to discover on the news.

Pahokee was interesting, racially relevant, and somewhat nostalgic. Kinda had me wanting to move to back to an Afro-American community/city.

(significantly easier to read on my blog)

Notable Things:

1) The contrast of student lives in school and adult lives in fields

2) Fashion photoshoot day

3) The drum off

4) How well the football games were presented, especially since I lack interest in the sport

5) Going from school to cheerleading to working at a "fried chicken store" on the same day

6) The consequences of having "hard working" parents

7) The Harvard recruiter

8) The Army recruiter

Side Notes:

There are two back-to-back moments during prom night that had me wondering if there was any tension between the two racial groups.

While this is the directors' debut film, they've made three short films about Pahokee.

This is a surprisingly difficult documentary to find a representative photo for. If you search for one, you'll primarily see Afro-Americans, Latinx-Americans, football, cheerleading, prom, and fashion, but nothing that I feel accurately represents it or the four main people as a group (like a photo of them all together). It just gets into too much for me to feel okay with limiting it to any of those one topics. Fortunately, the website had a photo that encompassed both racial groups and the city's youth celebrating what I assume to be Día de Muertos (Day of the Living).

The more I follow the film's Facebook page, the more I feel like this film is special. After I saw Pahokee at the 42nd Denver Film Festival in early November, it traveled to Brazil, Poland, New York City, Germany, France, Austin, Key West, Portugal, and China.

Statement: If you're the type of person to meet someone from the lower-/working-class who is Afro-/Latinx-American and immediately assume stereotypes about them, do yourself and society a favor by watching this documentary.

Minor Spoiler: The decision to capture the person keeping an eye out with a revolver alongside (who I assume to be) his peers squatting behind cars to avoid potential bullets and then dash over to the two mothers holding down three or four kids while someone repeatedly yells out "get down!", lay with them, and keep the camera focused on their shocked faces was just... excellent. Keep that camera person out of a warzone. Or don't. Might turn out to be another Marie Colvin from A Private War (2018).

About the Trailer:

Nevermind dat sweet transition 2/3rds through, it only starts kicking in the slight spoilers (à la ruining dem moments) at 01:16, so it's fairly safe to watch.

Disclosure:

I attended the director Q&A during the 42nd Denver Film Festival immediately after watching the documentary.

This is a beautifully shot journey of confusing proportions during rough times in a world where night has fallen eternal and strange things start accumulating. Expect discomfort and confusion, but prepare for scenes of sudden slow tension that lingers on-screen and off. If you dig films that take their time bringing you into a world and allowing you to take from it what you will, you'll probably dig this one. If you prefer things made clear, move along. If you're the type of person to ask "What's going on? Why'd they do that?", don't see this with a crowd.

Having seen it twice within a 24-hour period, I must say it's worth a second viewing if not just to catch all the foreshadowing and better understand what the hell is going on. I'm not saying anything about the plot because I don't want to ruin or alter anyone's journey.

Things I Like:

1) The way it's entirely composed of long takes and tracking shots

2) How every moment of every damn scene is screenshot-worthy

3) Dat consistent rough-form cinematography

4) Dat almost non-existent soundtrack

5) The way it's almost subtly dark

6) The telling of Icarus

7) Dat ending

Favorite Character:

Lady Padmé. For the look of her (even when bare) and her words.

Similar:

1) Long Day's Journey Into Night (2018). For its slowness, story-telling, and cinematography.

2) Dwelling in the Fuchun Mountains (2019). For its beautiful slowness and cinematography.

3) Paranoid Park (2007). For dem screenshot-worthy scenes.

I love this film for three reasons: the cinematography, the soundtrack, and the characters.

I love the way the camera is almost always in the right place at the right time, capturing the moment as it unfolds. I love the sudden yet smooth track insertion and the way it's woven into the scenes. I love the characters as people who are just getting through life, its hardships, and its while also taking the time to live enough to love living.

Side Notes:

1) If you go into this film knowing noting, you'll probably enjoy it more.

2) I'm digging the way the opening and end credits were done.

3) Just like the case of How Fernando Pessoa Saved Portugal (2018), I get the strong feeling that I lack certain understandings necessary to "get" the meaning and reasoning behind many things portrayed throughout the film. For instance, le fruit.

Things I Like:

1) How all three characters-Nour, Laila, and Salma-have their own endings and resolutions.

2) The way it touches on the racial matter of speaking Arabic in public.

3) The fact that the crew chose three characters of different sizes.

4) Dat soundtrack.

5) Da flow of tension.

Things I Love:

1) The use of music.

2) The end scene.

3) Laila's resolution and just how intense it felt.

4) The way a surprising resolution brought me to tears.

5) The intimacy of le head rest, les hands, le father, and les three who drink.

Favorite Character:

Laila. For her choices, the way she powers through the painful ones, and her style.

Similar:

Lipstick Under My Burkha (2016), but much lighter.

About the trailers:

Movieclips Indie's (1:40) doesn't show minor spoilers until 1:02 and moderate ones until 1:20.

Dagbladet's (2:26) shows a minor spoiler early on but doesn't show moderate ones until 1:31.

I recommend Movieclips Indie's if you want minimal information about what happens since knowing anything would ruin the flow of tension.

Mini Review: The plot touched (and sometimes dwelled) on very interesting subjects and really could have made it a better film if they gave a damn more about it{1}, but it worked just fine as an action film with impressive technical work and an interesting plot. As a story with an understandable main character, it gets a 3.75/5. As an action film in which one dude must go up against his younger self, it gets a 4.5/5. Can you imagine going in not knowing who the assassin was, though?

Side Notes:

1) The first half of the first boss fight and almost the entirety of the second were great to watch. The third was great for the first two-thirds and good for the last.

2) There were atleast two revelations/twists that I didn't exactly see coming.

3) Some of the dialogue scenes were solid, especially in the first half.

4) Looking back, the first shootout was like someone saw the one for John Wick: Chapter 1 (2014) and thought "...he can be better."

5) Clay gave me some Darth Bane / Palpatine vibes in certain scenes. Not saying he was evil for evil's sake, though, just clearly the pragmatically dark side of equation.

6) There are three female characters in this movie. Two are named. Though I find it somewhat unfortunate that it fails the Bechdel Test, I can see how passing it would change the flow of the smoothly point-to-point action movie that this is. If it focused more on the plot like I mentioned earlier, then it totally could have passed.

Favorite Scene: The "old man" interrogation. It was so realistic and well acted (or maybe I'm a bit prejudiced) that I felt for the other character the whole time while also knowing why the interrogation needed to happen in the first place. Didn't expect to feel so torn in that moment or wanting it to just end (in a good way).

Implied Minor Spoilers:

1) I appreciate the way the movie didn't go the obvious romantic route even though it left me with questions as to the future of its characters.

2) While I have personal problems with the typical portrayal of males giving into societal norms and embracing fatherhood when they either aren't ready or don't want it (I'm looking at you, Spider Man: Into the Spider Verse), I felt for this one. It was just done in a realistic and understandable way.



Technical Review:

The higher frame rate wasn't noticed much at first (other than in the first two minutes). Things just seemed naturally smoother in a way. It was more noticeable when Junior came into play, especially when the shooting started. It became appreciated during the CQC fight between Henry and Junior.

That being said, the high frame rate only looked bad during the "bike race". It looked like jittery graphics from a video game with the way Henry's jacket flopped in the wind. I'm assuming they didn't manage to make the high frame rate look good at high speeds. The only other problem with the scene was the way Junior's movements (along with his bike) looked a bit... off. Not quite jittery like the jacket. Just lacking a natural flow.

I'm keeping in mind that Junior was always a stunt double anytime he and Henry were in the same scene/shot because I presume that had something to do with it. Meh.

Overall, the high frame rate was great. Just not something that a regular drama or non-visual documentary would need. Worth an extra $5? For this movie, yeah.

As for the 3D? I either didn't notice it or enjoyed the way it enhanced certain scenes. Namely, the opening shot, first underwater scene, and car ride scene.

As for Junior's CGI? There are two scenes that it looks very noticeable in. The first was a short "wtf, guys?", but the second was a long "damn, y'all, fix this ****" moment.

As much as I'd like to get a comparison, I never got a round to watching it in 2D 24fps. Partially because of time and budget, but mostly because the plot wasn't consistently interesting enough for me to watch it again without wanting to just jump to the action and certain dialogue scenes.

Disclosure: I saw and discussed the film with a group of males who definitely had a moderate affect on my opinion of the movie. That being said, I'm pretty sure I like it more than most of them.

{1} See 10/25th comment on my Letterboxd review.

Having no clue what this film was going to be about, I went in expecting something short. What I got was a documentary of sorts that suddenly morphed into a reenactment (upon 2nd viewing) and continued through a curious female's journey to learn more of this faded Kathlene Parlow--a violinist of seeming significance who history forgot. One thing I must say is that while the length itself is representative of a matter that is only clear at the end, it's interpretable what exactly it represents and even means.

Things I Like:

1) The immersive close ups.

2) The use of photos and still shots.

3) The song.

My gosh, this is a beautifully strange one. The consistency within its presentation and performances. The sudden "wait, wtf did they just do with the... whatever" moments. The representation of the overwhelming problems of youth. The curious length of conversations that I could not help but wonder the necessity of. Y'all, this is not a typical film deserving a wide theatrical release. What would fit its "self" is being screened with a crowd of people curious to experience this beautiful humorous butterfly the way it should be--with a live audience. Like Hausu (1977)-but not that weird-and others after it, this factory of bread feels like something unmeant to be experienced alone.

Favorite Characters:

1) Jordan. For her attitude and way about things.

2) Elsa. For her gentleness and motherly concerns.

3) Jan. For her headstrong-ness and self.

Things I Like:

1) The dialogue at certain points.

2) The soundtrack.

3) The absurdity of what is May Ray.

4) The "act-tor" that is Sir Walter.

5) The family moment.

6) The constant silent background noise.

7) The cinematography.

Trailer Warning: The only parts of the trailer that spoils anything other than a certain funny moment are 0:56-1:00 and, if you lipread, 1:16-1:21.

Mini Review: The plot touched (and sometimes dwelled) on very interesting subjects and really could have made it a better film if they gave a damn more about it{1}, but it worked just fine as an action film with impressive technical work and an interesting plot. As a story with an understandable main character, it gets a 3.75/5. As an action film in which one dude must go up against his younger self, it gets a 4.5/5. Can you imagine going in not knowing who the assassin was, though?

Side Notes:

1) The first half of the first boss fight and almost the entirety of the second were great to watch. The third was great for the first two-thirds and good for the last.

2) There were atleast two revelations/twists that I didn't exactly see coming.

3) Some of the dialogue scenes were solid, especially in the first half.

4) Looking back, the first shootout was like someone saw the one for John Wick: Chapter 1 (2014) and thought "...he can be better."

5) Clay gave me some Darth Bane / Palpatine vibes in certain scenes. Not saying he was evil for evil's sake, though, just clearly the pragmatically dark side of equation.

6) There are three female characters in this movie. Two are named. Though I find it somewhat unfortunate that it fails the Bechdel Test, I can see how passing it would change the flow of the smoothly point-to-point action movie that this is. If it focused more on the plot like I mentioned earlier, then it totally could have passed.

Favorite Scene: The "old man" interrogation. It was so realistic and well acted (or maybe I'm a bit prejudiced) that I felt for the other character the whole time while also knowing why the interrogation needed to happen in the first place. Didn't expect to feel so torn in that moment or wanting it to just end (in a good way).

Implied Minor Spoilers:

1) I appreciate the way the movie didn't go the obvious romantic route even though it left me with questions as to the future of its characters.

2) While I have personal problems with the typical portrayal of males giving into societal norms and embracing fatherhood when they either aren't ready or don't want it (I'm looking at you, Spider Man: Into the Spider Verse), I felt for this one. It was just done in a realistic and understandable way.



Technical Review:

The higher frame rate wasn't noticed much at first (other than in the first two minutes). Things just seemed naturally smoother in a way. It was more noticeable when Junior came into play, especially when the shooting started. It became appreciated during the CQC fight between Henry and Junior.

That being said, the high frame rate only looked bad during the "bike race". It looked like jittery graphics from a video game with the way Henry's jacket flopped in the wind. I'm assuming they didn't manage to make the high frame rate look good at high speeds. The only other problem with the scene was the way Junior's movements (along with his bike) looked a bit... off. Not quite jittery like the jacket. Just lacking a natural flow.

I'm keeping in mind that Junior was always a stunt double anytime he and Henry were in the same scene/shot because I presume that had something to do with it. Meh.

Overall, the high frame rate was great. Just not something that a regular drama or non-visual documentary would need. Worth an extra $5? For this movie, yeah.

As for the 3D? I either didn't notice it or enjoyed the way it enhanced certain scenes. Namely, the opening shot, first underwater scene, and car ride scene.

As for Junior's CGI? There are two scenes that it looks very noticeable in. The first was a short "wtf, guys?", but the second was a long "damn, y'all, fix this ****" moment.

As much as I'd like to get a comparison, I never got a round to watching it in 2D 24fps. Partially because of time and budget, but mostly because the plot wasn't consistently interesting enough for me to watch it again without wanting to just jump to the action and certain dialogue scenes.

Disclosure: I saw and discussed the film with a group of males who definitely had a moderate affect on my opinion of the movie. That being said, I'm pretty sure I like it more than most of them.

{1} See 10/25th comment on my Letterboxd review.

This was difficult to watch at times, but hella captivating throughout. Arthur's reasoning is believable, his sanity is questionable, and his life is indeed one hell of a joke. Like watching an extreme example of what happens when people on the lower end lose access to social programs. This can very easily be taken as a commentary on mental illness kept unchecked. More than that, it's a story about a guy who accepts his "crazy" and transcends poverty, circumstance, and societal... at everyone else's expense.

Don't expect Joker to be a feel good movie. I mean, unless you're into really dark humor and comeuppance. It's the kind of film to discuss with others afterward and really think about for awhile. If you want a 2-hour Cards Against Humanity experience, see it with others. If you don't want to fail other people's litmus tests, absolutely do not.

While others were (constantly) reminded of Taxi Driver (1976) and King of Comedy (1982), only the former of which I've seen ~10 years ago, I was not thinking of any other films the entire time.

Things I Liked:

1) The notebook.

2) When she tells it like it is.

3) The first solo dance.

4) The way the third (staircase) dance was done, especially at the end.

5) The sadness of Arthur.

6) The kindness of Arthur.

7) When the Joker is fully formed.

8) The tensity of the "talk" scene.

9) When the body is laid on the hood.

10) The disturbing feel of the last dance.

11) The fact that I'm pretty sure I saw Donald Glover with a cloth covering his mouth at the end.

12) How oddly it sat with me while I watched the credits.

Favorite Joke: "The worst part about having a mental illness is people expect you to behave as if you DON'T."

Statement:

1) When your savior is a madman, there's either something wrong with society or something wrong with you. Probably both.

2) I can see the potential problem with this film being released in the US right now. On a certain level, we didn't need this with our current political climate. On another level, the matters of class, social programs, mental illness, medication, and who gets to decide are all worth portraying. Meh.

3) If you know your kids are gonna see this one way or another, consider seeing it with them and starting a conversation about its topics after.

Question: Was Arthur right? Was Joker?

Disclosure: I watched and discussed the film with a very diverse group of people.

This was indeed a very tense film after the potato hits the fan and somehow less so after the reveal. Maybe the shock of it balanced me out or something. Though I was bothered by some personal decisions considering the situation (stop making so much noise!), I stayed invested in the plot and rooting for the main character... even though I was critiqsuing the hell out of dem decisions (bruh).

While High Tension--otherwise known as Switchblade Romance--is brutal in some scenes, it's not excessively gory. That being said, I wasn't expecting some of the kills to play out the way they did and was caught off guard by them. When the wire gets swung, tho? Y'all, that **** was 90% satisfying.

Reflecting back on everything that happened, I think this is worth a second viewing. Primarily in regards to the revelation since it'll give viewers a new perspective.

Side Notes:

1) I like how discussable the revelation is.

2) To my recollection, there's only one scene that had me laughing. It's so absurd, and yet understandable, of a moment that it's satisfyingly funny.

3) It was interesting and quite a breather to see Maïwenn-director of Polisse (2011)-in this, especially considering the difference in roles.

4) I've been warned by other reviews to not watch it dubbed. Having only seen it subbed, I cannot comment on the importance of heeding that warning.

5) High Tension is part of the New French Extremity genre. To sum it up, I'll quote Matt Armitage's 25YL article "Method Behind the Madness: New French Extremity" further down. If you're gonna read the article, which you really should if you're curious about the genre or its history, be aware that its contents will spoil the films it brings up. In the case of High Tension, it will absolutely spoil dat sweet revelation, so definitely skip those paragraphs once you get to its designated section.

"This unyielding focus is one of the most common identifying factors of New French Extremity. The director doesn't flinch when it comes to showing you uncomfortable images, and in fact extends that discomfort, revels in it, until you the viewer are forced to question why you are watching it and whether you should be.

(...)

New French Extremity focuses the camera on the violence we do to others, to ourselves, and forces us to watch, to sit with ourselves. It doesn't look away for us, it makes us decide whether we should." -Matt Armitage

Disclosure: My thoughts were influenced by the group I discussed the film with immediately after.

Let me tell you why you need to see this film... blind... and while it's still in theatres.

First, it's a hell of an endeavor that I skipped at the Batsu Japanese Film Festival last year (didn't think it'd be that interesting) and am so~ glad Alamo Drafthouse decided to screen for its USA release. It's funny, interesting, and a hell of a trip that just spins you round before leading you down a strange unknown path. Trust its direction. You'll be impressed by all the places you go.

Second, it gives the impression of being a love project of people who felt the need to challenge themselves with something, let's say, unusual and notable. They should probably be awarded for what they accomplished and, honestly, we should reward this behavior so we get more of it.

Third, if you aren't in the film making industry it'll probably make you see films a different way since it gets into matters that I don't recall ever seeing portrayed in a film before. There's no way to properly explain this without spoiling things that should never be spoiled, so I'll leave it there.

Side Notes:

1) Beyond the description, this film is so worth seeing blind. The Shudder Exclusive trailer (Alamo's preview) is very spoilerful and the SGIFF 2018 trailer is minorly spoilerful. Daniel Ott was right, "the less you know the better."

2) According to John Squires' brief Bloody Disgusting article (contains spoiler image), OCD will be released on the Shudder streaming service on Tuesday, 9/24th.

3) It's so funny that it should be seen with a large audience so you can all enjoy the laughter together.

4) Stay for the credits.

Disclosure:

I discussed the film with another immediately after watching it.

Knowing nothing of Portugal, I didn't get the jokes, but they seemed to be ever present in a deadpan way. That being said, there were two moments that had me chuckling. Hell, the entire exorcism of Coca-Louca scene was funny. And now that I think about it, rather campy. Though I'm unsure why, that scene reminds me of Dracula: Dead and Loving It (1995)

The film's 5 minute opening consists of two things. The first is a narration of Pessoa's poem "The Bell in My Town." The second is a patient collection of interesting shots of various places and things set to a male gently singing a Fado song of seeming importance while two different guitars accompany.

The film has plentiful steady shots and back-and-forth closeups during conversations. There's something about seeing the actors deliver their lines to the fullest by way of careful facial expressions. Something that omits any need for an accompanying soundtrack that sets the mood/intent on its own and muddies the waters in the process.

Overall, this is a funny and interesting "mini-film" (directly?) based on a true story. I imagine people who are from or live in Portugal would appreciate it far more than this foreigner could, especially if they know the Coca-Louca story or atleast know of Fernando Pessoa.

Side Notes:

1) I enjoyed the sense making of the ending.

2) When his obvious/suspiciously evil twin (Álvaro de Campos-his heteronym) visits, tho. WTF? Like a young Johnny Depp in an old school suit.

3) I found myself listening to Fado music for the first time on SoundCloud a day or two after watching parts of the film again for this review. Interesting stuff. Somehow led me to a SoundCloud station.

4) If you want to understand the title, google "Coca-Cola murders union leaders" or give KillerCoke a visit.

5) Coca-Cola remained banned in Portugal for 40 years, only to be allowed in 1977.

Disclosure:

I read, after finishing the 2nd draft of this review, MUBI's Notebook Interview titled Waiting For the Hidden One: Eugène Green Discusses "How Fernando Pessoa Saved Portugal." I recommend it if you want to understand more of what's being (re)presented and why. I highly recommend it if you are not understanding of Portuguese culture.

Without context and knowing nothing of the makers' intentions, this film is an exploration of (passionate) sex, accepting the bizarre, and finding one's satisfaction. Some weird **** happens, yes, but it gets interesting from there. Just let the four song soundtrack take you in for a sensual ride.

Side Note: I really enjoyed seeing three actors (Simon Thiébaut, Thomas Ducasse, and Félix Maritaud) from Knife + Heart (2018) and am going to assume that they're either part of a guild/union or primarily do independent films.

Similar: In the Valley Below's The Pink Chateau (2019), which you should see live in theatres if they're ever near you. It's far less weird than this and arguably more sexual.

Mini Review: A drama influenced thriller about a religious and somewhat self-isolating community that's effectively blanketing a realistic romance.

Rant Time: People say this movie has a slow first half during which nothing happens, but that's a damn lie. There's so much going on in the mid-ground of the plot and I ate it up gladly. (minor end spoiler ahead) The ending's damn near perfect with its conclusiveness and beautiful with its visuals and performance. I mean, seriously people, how much do you want handed to you?

This is the type of film that expects its audience to think about what they're seeing and put themselves in its characters' shoes. Damn, I thought I really liked it, but I just realized I love this movie.

Side Note: I enjoyed the realistic romance that this film presented, especially the conflicts and moments of intimacy. I don't know about the others, but the Official US Trailer (2:14) is mostly safe.

I don't understand what I just watched or what the directors' intentions were when making it, but it was a fascinating observation of what seems to be a series of interconnected moments in the daily lives of three (primarily two) people. What starts off as a confusion of what the hell is the point of this leads into a transfixion on everything that's happening and ends with a beautiful moment of sadly resounding intimacy.

The two primary people (because they feel more like real people than characters considering the way this was filmed) are the only two of the three to have an arc of sorts. They were clearly the focus. While this works for me, it leaves the other one without... filling. As if he were a mere plot device to reveal a significant part of the "other one."

The long take ending was surprisingly beautiful even though disturbing in a way. I'm left with a feeling of The Fire (2015), except I can sympathize more with one person here as opposed to the two characters there.

Side Note:

1) I watched certain scenes again after my initial viewing and I'm still unsure if the the choir singer and the girlfriend are the same person.

2) There's something very significant that happens during the ending that I feel should not be spoiled for anyone. That being said, I've noticed atleast two reviews casually spoiling it without warning. Spare yourself and just watch the film if you can.

3) Be aware that the only trailer I've found for it is not entirely representative of the film. It is somewhat of a teaser, though.

First of all, let me tell you about dat opening. The film starts with a weird compilation of different songs set to a seemingly insignificant time-lapse of some river-over-passing bridge (I learned later that it's the St. Johns Bridge). Then the opening goes on for three more minutes surprisingly (and somehow beautifully). It's strange and a little unsettling. In hindsight, its probably a way to prepare the viewer for the strangeness of the film.

Now for the plot. This is a coming of age story about a kid who, after a traumatic experience, is dealing with the realization that don't matter. Girlfriends, divorce, teachers--all that . It's unfortunate that he had to be scarred for life only to effectively start growing up too quickly, but that's life for you. It just doesn't give. And as the movie progresses we realize, to some degree, that neither does he.

While I found the back and forth time jumps to be confusing at first, I eventually got used to and learned to appreciate them as part of the cinematic experience. It's like you're on this confusing journey with Alex, but homeboy keepin' secrets from everybody so you're trying to figure out what happened and why he's doing the things he's doing.

There are a number of scenes showing him just walking around as if part of his daily routine of sorts, but it seems more like an attempt to escape his concerns. This is quite the contrast to a scene that chronologically happens beforehand-the scene of him driving to the park. I found myself appreciating the intermission that this was. While it was odd at first, like the ladder climb in Metal Gear Solid 3, it doubled as a relaxing moment of subtle tension and an opportunity to really see him, especially as a regular kid.

Now about the cinematography. I like to take screenshots of films, and this one is full of screenshot-worthy scenes, especially during key conversations. Namely, the one between him and the officer. The cinematographer does everything right during that questioning scene. And dat ever encroaching camera? Damn, that's a nice shot. Don't even get me started on dat sound effect.

Speaking of sound, Paranoid Park does something unusual with its soundtrack to the point of being rather experimental, especially when certain sounds come into sudden focus as if painfully yanked straight from Alex's head in order to let us into a place he's keeping guarded from everyone else. With the way things are done, I was left throughout the film to wonder what was with the voice and sounds blended into the music. Honestly, I feel like there's more to the soundtrack and sound effects than I realize.

Similar to Wanuri Kahiu's Rafiki (2018), Paranoid Park has dialogue scenes without lip movement. I counted two in total. The second one was well enough hidden, but the first seemed unintentionally left noticeable. Either way, they both felt artful and experimental.

Speaking of dialogue, there are a few moments where characters say unnatural lines for their age. I found them very noticeable and a little distracting in terms of believability, but they don't ruin the scenes so it's forgivable.

If there's anything I must critique it's the fact that they're obviously teenagers until half-way through. That is to say most of their acting is rather raw and without projected character. Sometimes this works in such a way that the film seems more stylized. Other times, they're obviously teenagers. Except for Macy and Jennifer, though. They felt more natural, especially Jennifer. Speaking of it working, I suddenly remember his little brother. That kid's voice was such that it seemed as if there was something wrong with his mic. He only had a couple of scenes, so I never got used to it.

Let this minor spoiler digest for a moment: It took a traumatic experience for him to stop wasting time with someone he didn't like and start spending more with someone he did. That being said, I like the presentation of an obvious opportunity to pursue the prettier Rachel and repeat the same mistake.

Other things I loved:

1) The long takes.

2) The intimate focus on people's faces, especially when the editor slows it down.

3) The March of the Skater Kids.

4) The reflection shots.

5) When the hands [don't] touch.

6) When the last piece of the puzzle is found and everything makes sense.

7) That the best scene in the entire film is near the end when she's "pushing" him along the road.

Other noteworthy things: 1) There are entire scenes where Alex is effectively bearing the face of a liar. The way he delivers his lines during them is almost uncanny.

2) The fact that he wasn't even into it.

3) The conversations with Jennifer, especially the last one.

4) The fact that his parents are naturally clueless.

5) The line that tells the future.

6) The reason and revelation of why he's narrating.

7) The question I still have of whether or not he told the officer.

8) The fact that the actors who play Jared, Alex, Macy, and Jennifer are all 16, 15, 14, and 13.

Fun Fact: This film was shot with an aspect ratio of 1.33, which is "often referred to as 'academy', and more accurately 1.37:1." It's very noticeable, but not bothersome. In fact, the film looks wrong when cropped down to a more typical aspect ratio, which is what you'll find in it's many YouTube videos. There are just significant (and yet unappreciated) portions of the footage that become torn away from view when it isn't presented with the aspect ratio that the film was clearly designed to be presented in. Read Joe Beres' Walker article "Paranoid Park's aspect ratio conundrum" to learn more and see an example of this for yourself.

WARNING: Having watched the film long before seeing the trailer, I highly recommend avoiding as much info about its plot as possible. That includes the premise and YouTube comments.

"Shut up and run."

I took a chance with this one, and I'm glad I did. The world is interesting, taking place atleast thousands of years from today in a steampunk world of traction cities, Municipal Darwinism, and Resurrected Men. There was so much to like. The lore, the world, the main characters, the tragic backstory, the fact that Asian Morpheus makes that outfit look good, and the non-typical balance of romance, bromance, and friendship... all between two people. Speaking of romance, the writer managed to surprise me by defying expectations with how those scenes played out.

There's something strangely appreciate-able about the fact that the main character wasn't "hot" or even sexualized. Asian Morpheus did wear that shirt, though, so I guess they found a way to sneak it in there. Not that I'm complaining. Hell, other than that, I don't recall anything that could be considered a sexualization in this.

If there's any reason why you should see this in theatres, it's for dem visuals, especially when the traction cities and Shrike are on screen. Dat devastation near the end, tho. It hurt deeply. In an instant, I became anti-war and pro-denuclearization. That being said, it was beautifully done.

About the ending. It made complete sense for them to make that decision, especially considering what their leader says a few scenes prior. However, there is something bizarre about seeing those mofos being treated that way immediately after everything that happened. Just think back to their attitudes towards every "positive" event they witnessed.

Side Notes:

1) I missed the first 1-5 minutes.

2) There's a particular death scene that was unexpected and touching.

3) I didn't find this film to be too predictable, and I enjoyed its twists.

3) There seems to have been some sort of smear campaign against this movie. It's rather unfortunate, especially when considering Let Me Explain's "This Movie Lost $100 Million Mortal Engines Explained" video on it (major plot and book spoilers after 04:13).

-updated 08/05/2019

This was so realistically dark, I love it. It's like a darker Passengers (2016) becoming involved with a lighter High Life (2018) and then journeying aimlessly to a distant moon together with a score that's mutely dope.

If you enjoy pondering the bleakness of existence or simply wonder what would happen if a bunch of people escaping damnation suddenly became trapped in their new found sarcophagus while traveling to new hopes, this is your movie. If I'm losing you, it's got a plot that flows surprisingly well with its ups and downs, a few notable uplifting scenes, and some really interesting things going on.

There are a couple of visually and aurally entrancing scenes that kick in out of nowhere. Namely, da club. Y'all, I love it. I must explain, though, that the club itself isn't a random occurrence in the film. It's essential to the world the spacefarers must adapt to. Almost as essential as Mima herself.

Character-wise, Aniara has a huge focus on how people handle the scenario they all find themselves in. One's seemingly stoic, but arguably just plain strong, and puts her focus into meaningful work. Another's letting the hopelessness take her into its indisputable arms and is seemingly longing for an end to the useless efforts to save themselves. A third is slowly breaking down as the hopelessness pulls her into its gaping reach and only wishes she was as strong as the first.

While I can understand people's problem with the way the film touches certain subjects or themes without taking the time to fully explore them, I must say that I felt very satisfied with Aniara's multi-course meal, especially the dessert.

The less you know, the better. If you're considering it, go without reading or watching anything about it (the teaser's mostly safe, but the official trailer has moderate spoilers throughout). Don't read the YouTube comments!

Side Notes:

1) She wrong for what she did, though. Not her, the main one.

2) I want to watch the last 15 minutes all over again.

3) There are four wonderful and beautiful moments of intimacy in this. Only the 2nd and 3rd are sexual.

This is a casual presentation of the daily lives of three Moroccan females. One's college-driven, overstressed, and trying her hardest. Another's falling out of interest with academia, is headstrong (not always in a good way), and would rather enjoy her youth than focus entirely on her future. The other's their mother--Fatima, our central character, voice of reason, and primary holder of traditional values.

The drama in this film mostly comes from stress, expectations, and peers. Nesrine is a medical student, so you'll get to witness her study a lot and stress over grades. Souad is a snobbish pretty girl with an attitude that only the most confident of males can subdue, so naturally she has an issue with authority and even her mother's means of income. Fatima is a house cleaner and school custodian who wants her daughters to succeed and appreciate their circumstances in France compared to hers' growig up in Morocco. As for their peers, the French women seem to take issue with Fatima's headscarf. The Muslim women take issue with the daughters' behavior and the family's sudden lack of interaction with them. The young (and old) males, on the other hand, are very interested in Souad. Both to her amusement and annoyance.

Fatima is an enjoyable watch. I just wish I could discuss it with someone who's been in similar situations to get their perspective and story. There are enough well-timed transitions between the three main characters for the film to stay interesting. One thing that I will comment on very briefly is the relationship between the mother and father. That is all.

¡Las Sandinistas! is a very enlightening documentary that shows the effort of a few rebels who were willing to give up significant portions of their lives for a better country and better world for their demographic. The focus is primarily on the female combatants of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), their side of the history that they were excluded from, and what became of them after. The documentary is in the style of a collection of interconnected interviews with footage from the events to help the audience feel like they were there (think: Spike Lee's "When the Levees Fell" documentary). Though they aren't interviewing to tell a sob story, let's just say life's not fair.

I've never heard about the Nicaraguan Revolution, so this was fascinating to watch. I hope the producers/director manage to get it shown in schools and universities.

Side Note: If you've ever seen Dr Robert's Beckford's "Blood And Fire" documentary on "Jamaica's struggle for independence and political autonomy," then you won't be surprised by what happens during the second act. Speaking of which, a certain someone makes a surprising appearance. You'll probably recognize the voice, you might not believe it when they say who it is, but once his face was shown... the audience clapped.

Ciello is a beautifully shot, wonderfully strange, preciously portrayed collection of perspectives held by those who appreciate the beauty and wonder of the sky like no city-dweller can. The quiet moments were the best moments. Leaving me to ponder all there is to fear and all there is to cherish from the infinite unknowns of the universe.

My favorite conversation of all the ones shown was between the two algae collectors in Los Pozos, Huasco.