Showing posts with label 10 for 10. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 10 for 10. Show all posts

Thursday, June 25, 2020

10 for 10: TV Ketchup

[10 for 10, that's 10 tv shows which we give ourselves 10 minutes apiece to write about.  Part of our problem is we don't often have the spare hour or two to give to writing a big long review for every movie or TV show we watch.  How about a 10-minute non-review full of half-remembered scattershot thoughts? Surely that's doable? ]

In this edition:
1. Supergirl Season 4
2. His Dark Materials Season 1 (HBO)
3. Locke & Key Season 1 (Netflix)
4. Titans Season 2 (Netflix)
5. Avenue 5 Season 1 (HBO)
6. Queen Sono Season 1 (Netflix)
7. The Last Dance (Netflix)
8. SNL at Home (NBC)
9.Star Wars: Clone Wars Season 7 (Disney+)
10. Shrill S2 (Crave)

aaaaallonz-y
---

The DC-CW shows (colloquially referred to as "The Arrowverse" because Arrow was the launching point for all of it) have become... how best to say... cumbersome I think.  There's a lot of them with more on the way, each with differing season lengths, but most of them running longer than necessary.  With the end of Arrow, I've felt exhausted with the majority of them.  Short dips back into the Flash continue to be more aggravating than enjoyable; Legends of Tomorrow has gone on a non-superhero path I don't really love (though it does have a great tone and fun stuff); Batwoman I fell off of early and haven't been able to get back on; and Black Lightning I tend to leave for summer binging on Netflix.  Which leaves Supergirl.

Supergirl is the show I watch with my daughter but she's become a binge watcher and doesn't like to wait, so I had to find time to set aside so we could catch up.  As I write this, Season 5 is just shy of its finale, withheld because of COVID-19, but we only just caught up on Season 4.  We got a few episodes in when they originally aired and then were sidetracked for, like, a year.  It wasn't anything to do with quality or content, as I think Season 4 may be the best yet for the show.

The season features a very heady anti-immigration storyline, where an angry and xenophobic professor starts up both a street gang under the guise of Agent Liberty, and later becomes a right-wing mouthpiece talk show host, followed by a political opportunity under Bruce Boxleitner's equally xenophobic presidency (ripped from the headlines!).  The show handles this subject matter tremendously well.  It's upsetting the level of manipulation and lies that anti-immigration mouthpieces perpetrate, but the show makes it clear that the root their hatred is actually better recognized as fear. 

Meanwhile at the DEO, Alex and Kara have to deal with their new boss, a woman who is so buttoned down as to be impossible to read or guess her motivations or actions.  She's very much a duty-over-dignity, follow-chain-of-command type, even when it disagrees with her.  She expects the same of her subordinates.  It creates a lot of meaty conflict for the team to work through.  Especially when your commander-in-chief is obviously in the wrong, do you follow your conscience or your sworn duty.

The season careens into left field in the final third as they deal with the Russian copy of Supergirl created during the "Elseworlds" crossover, and Lex Luthor enters the fray.  I don't think anyone thought Jon Cryer would make for a good Luthor, turns out we were all wrong.  He, dare I say it, may be the best live action Lex of all time.  He's absolutely phenomenal, and even showing he's been pulling the strings of almost everything all season still doesn't satisfy the fact that there are so many xenophobes still calling for aliens to go home and ready for violence against them, but it just shuts down their most prominent propagators.  It's definitely a subject Supergirl can't just muscle her way through.

[12:20]

---
I initially gave up on His Dark Materials after two episodes.  It was plodding and kind of boring.  I didn't understand the rules of the world or the intent of what I was being shown.  The book series by Philip Pullman has a very good reputation but the Daniel Craig/Nicole Kidman film was panned both by critics and fans of the series, and this HBO series was supposed to get it right.  If this dull intro was getting it right, I wasn't sure I could stay in.  I thought better to wait for the series to complete, so I could binge it, rather than try to follow week to week.

It took its time, but I suppose it did do justice to the source.  I've never read the books, but just past the halfway point, the series took on incredible weight, and what seemed like misguided kiddie fare turned into a deeply disturbing, dark roam through alternate realities.  I'm not sure how to get to where they did by the end, showing all the crushing disappointments and disasters in Lyra's life, without first taking her through the early journey, as tedious as it was.

I still don't fully understand some of the fantastical structures of the world (namely the sort of spirit animals everyone has, things the book likely clarifies outright), but the religious authoritarianism, and the callous disregard for life and well-being in their pursuit of suppressing thought and exploration of heretical ideas is literally bone-chilling.  This isn't Harry Potter-style high-adventure magic, it's a deeply tragic world that's devoid of really any humour and it's only Lyra's perseverance through the darkness that sheds any light.  The young cast is really great, and of course Ruth Wilson is always compelling to watch.

What I find most curious is, in the midst of world building this entire other reality, the story also introduces a character in "our" reality, an Earth more familiar to us, and another character who has found the soft spots that bridge the two.  The title sequence, hoping for - but not quite reaching- Game of Thrones highs, folds over with the idea of layers of realities, which seems to indicate that there's a multiverse happening, and that as much as anything leaves me intrigued.

It's definitely a slow, slow start, but the latter half makes for an enthralling journey overall.  It feels like there's a snowball effect at play and it's just going to get bigger and bigger from here.

[21:21]

---
The complete 6 volumes of Joe Hill and Gabriel Rodriguez Locke & Key had been sitting on my bookshelf for years, left unread by me, for no other reason than I have too many things sitting on the shelf to read with more usually coming every week.  There was a false start to adapting the series to network television a few years ago but thanks to Netflix it found a new life.  In anticipation of its release I binged, and binged hard the six volumes, finding a bit of a messy narrative but otherwise engrossing story full of weirdness and cleverness.

It's the story of the Locke family who, after the tragic murder of the family patriarch, move back to the  familial home in Massachusettes (?).  The matriarch and three kids are each in their own way experiencing PTSD fallout from the murder, and the weirdness of the family home (and some of the people in the town) are potentially just distorted images as a result. But the youngest, Bode, his imagination the most liberated, finds the strange keys around the house and their really absurd uses.  One unlocks a door that, when stepped through, turns that person into a spirit.  Another unlocks the mind, presenting a doorway that others can step into to look around.  Another still opens a cabinet that can repair anything to its original state.  And one even will open a doorway to anywhere.  The keys have powers, large and small, and there is a malevolent force in the wellhouse that wants them all.

The graphic novel series paints a history for the keys that leads into the reveal of their true origin and purpose.  The TV show does also, but has a much more difficult time negotiating the past and present, really not developing the history well at all. 

As well, the show seems to have difficulty with tone.  Where the comic book flirted with elements of adventure and horror, name checking both Lovecraft and Richard Matheson, the TV show doesn't really angle for any specific pastiche.  It just kind of happens.  It seems to lack guidance and concrete direction.  It progresses through the story but without any style or enthusiasm.  Its versions of the characters, like Tyler, Kinsey and Nina are all stripped down from the complexity of their comic book counterparts.  The graphic novel makes an attempt at exploring race issues (to muddled, potentially wrong-headed results), looks at depression, and alcoholism, where as the show pretty much avoids any difficult subjects.

It's not a very complex or challenging show, and actually not anywhere near as fun as it should be.  It wasn't uninteresting but I think reading the comics first made it harder to accept the choices the show made, even if they did make some improvements here and there.

[34:07]

---
Titans airs in the US on a streaming service called DC Universe, which gives its audience access to thousands of digital comics, and much of its back catalog of movies, cartoons and TV shows.  The big draw, however is its original programming - Titans, Doom Patrol, Harley Quinn, Young Justice and Swamp Thing all debuting on the service.  The rest of the world does not have DC Universe available to them so we have to hunt out our own sources for these shows, with Titans being the most accessible via Netflix.  However, Netflix only airs Titans after its seasons are complete on DC Universe, which means there is plenty of reviews and reactions to try and skip past online while we wait.

One of the things I noticed, though, was that week-to-week there seemed to be a lot of frustration with season 2 of show, and it's understandable.  It builds an over-arching narrative but it jumps and diverts to different characters and puts focus on side stories while leaving cliffhangers unresolved for an episode or two at a time.  On a week to week basis I can totally see this being aggravating, but in a binge situation, it's not even a thing.  In fact one of the biggest side diversions, a whole episode introducing Superboy to the program 9while we wait to see the resolution of Jason Todd's fall off a skyscraper rooftop from the end of the previous episode), is easily the series' best.

The show starts off Season 2 needing to resolve the Trigon/Rachel's Dad situation from season 1.  What seemed to perhaps be building to a new story arc is instead kind of haphazardly disposed of making for an inauspicious start to the new season.  But from there it just kind of crackles with energy and then keeps going, as it introduces new players (like Superboy, Deathstroke, and Rose Wilson), advances the storylines of older players and, more than anything, feels kind of like classic Wolfman-Perez soap-opera Titans of the 80's, but with a bit of (some might say unfortunate) Zack Snyder edge to it.   But the "fuck Batman" grit that misguided its first season is basically gone, and instead it really goes into its teen sidekick trauma, and the family that forms out of it.

We get so much, it's a loaded season, mostly centered around being unable to let go of the past, or forgive one's self for past sins, or escaping one's history.  This includes Bruce Wayne (played by Game of Thrones Iain Glen) helping Dick Grayson to resolve the issues that caused him to quit being Robin, steeling him to lead a new team; Starfire facing ghosts from her home; Hawk and Dove unable to escape from "the life"; and Jason Todd unable to escape the shadow of his own reputation.  The show gets so much right, that what it actually gets wrong makes it all the more glaring.  It's still trying too hard to be edgy with its swearing, and there's a bit too much moping about by superheroes (mopey superheroes are the worst *cough*The Flash*cough*) but it seems to slowly be crawling out of the darkness it started out in.  Despite a tragedy the conclusion leaves the promise that maybe bigger, brighter adventures are ahead next season.

[50:29]

---

Avenue 5 was a straight-up recommendation from Toast, and one I was grateful for.  I hadn't bothered to watch Veep but I did see Armando Iannucci's Death of Stalin (review sadly lost to the dark year), which was hilarious and right in my humour wheelhouse, full of clever wordplay, the sly back-biting between horrible but not unlikeable people, and grounded absurdism. 

Taking place on a galactic cruise ship, Avenue 5 has all those Iannucci trademarks that made Veep so popular (I'm guessing), but placed in a satirical future setting.  The problems on Earth are only hinted at and get shut out as the troubles on board the starcruiser become myopic.

It's been a long time since I've seen a good comedy of errors, one that manages to build in surprising and unexpected ways.  As one disaster after another occurs, the crew and guests aboard become embroiled in personality politics.  The disasters themselves range from massive to minor but it's the fallout from those that generates the intrigue and comedy.  Some disasters have silver linings, but sometimes silver linings can reflect deadly rays.  I love the character building here, and how all the characters slowly lose any pretense or artificial edifice they may have had.

Everyone is good in this, yes, even Josh Gad.  Hugh Laurie manages to escape the grizzled doctor drama and worm his way back into his comedy origins with the role as "Captain" of the ship, a role that allows him to mock his own fake American accent and grizzled persona.

Underneath the absurdity is a show that is examining class structures and how they affect modern politics.  As well it looks at the mindset of people that distrust the people in power, that perhaps is justified but which also mistakenly leads them to distrust experts in science and technology to their own detriment.  But it never hits you on the head with its commentary, it's just ugly and representational of modern times...and also funny.  The show is also not above a galactic-class poop joke.

It's certainly got its own unique tone and rhythm so I get why it hasn't caught on bigger, but it's pretty great, ridiculous fun.  Oh, and the soundtrack by Adem Ilhem is astounding, intoning horror at some of its biggest points of comedy.  It's very deftly handled.


[1:06:31]

---
You had me at South African spy.  Queen Sono follows the titular character, the daughter of a legendary revolutionary murdered when she was a child,  who has since become a top operative for the country's Special Operations Group.  She's super competent but also a little overconfident which makes her a little sloppy, and perhaps she's even a little suicidal.  Her best friend from childhood is a psychologist so she gets him to sign off on her psych evals even though something is clearly wrong.

The show works through Queen's history, her family, her trauma, but she tries to avoid working through any of it, and avoiding it seems to be causing her some serious harm.  As she starts to look deeper into her past while working on a case investigating a militant liberation group that uses her mother's name and visage as its rallying point, she starts to see inconsistencies in the story she's been told about her mother's death, lies that lead back to her own employers.

There's a tremendous character story with Queen Sono, but also its central adversarial story leads to a lot of intrigue that affects Queen and her supporting cast in different ways.  As well the story leads to some insight with South African politics and sub-saharan relations, as well as continental relations with particularly European interests.  It's not something I've been exposed much to, and with Netflix's backing it's a story told with quality production values.  Beyond that, the characters and situations have complexity, shades of grey that cause some debate as to what's really bad, and what other alternatives are there.

There are a couple drawbacks, mainly when the show tries to get invested in side stories of certain secondary characters, it's not handled very cleanly, often feeling forced and unnatural (Frederique's search for his missing sister always feels jammed in).  The other is it's very brief six-episode run leaves the viewer wholly unfulfilled as most of the balls juggled remain in the air.

The biggest revelation is Pearl Thusi who plays Queen.  She's damn charismatic, utterly captivating, fierce, intimidating and gorgeous.  Not that playing a super-spy is small potatoes, but she needs to be in a big profile superhero film, like, now. 

[1:17:30]

---
I flirted with watching basketball in high school.  I don't know if it was to fit in, or if it was out of genuine curiosity.  Lord knows I had no interest in playing it, and generally I avoided televised sports because of its lack of special effects.  But I was into hip hop, and hip hop was so integrated with basketball you couldn't see a music video without an NBA jersey, and then in '93 Shaquille O'Neal started rapping with the Fu-Shnickens (a group I really liked at the time).  Michael Jordan was everywhere, and the 92 dream team was just the most high-wattage sports star power of all time, it was hard not to be caught up in it all.

So yeah, I watched and even lived a little basketball throughout the 90's.  Not deep, deep into it, but I watched some regular season games, some playoff games, and most of the finals throughout the decade...I was still an outsider though, not fully invested.  I believed the hype, the unstoppable Bulls, the unconquerable Jordan, and I so desperately wanted the underdogs, pretty much any other team, to beat them.

The Last Dance follows Jordan and the Bulls through their 97-98 season in which they would go on to win their sixth championship in 8 years, and their second three-peat, an unheard of achievement in the history of the sport.  But in telling that story, mired with intrigue and furor internally and externally, the docu-series intercuts telling the history of its key players - Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Steve Kerr, Phil Jackson, Denis Rodman - and taking a hard profile look at each of the championship years (as well as the tumultuous two years between while Jordan was "retired".

It's a fascinating documentary, well told, despite the confusing leaping back-and-forth between 97-98 and all other periods.  In its efforts to concentrate narratives on specific players and time periods it has to tell the overall story out of sequence which leads to more than a bit of fuzziness in how it's all connected and how it all played out.  But I was rapt the whole time watching it.  We binged the first 6 rapidly then had to wait a week for two more and another week for the final two parts.  It's not like there was any question that the Bulls would win their 6th's championship, but it's the unparalleled insight into the team and its players, both from outside perspectives and from their own recollections.

Produced by Jordan, he had a hand in dispelling his own myth with this series.  He's a man of preternatural talent in the game, with unparalleled ambition and drive and that led him to be a very dominant and domineering force on the court and behind the scenes.  The astounding rise of his celebrity impacted everything around him and he had to accommodate for that.  As such he seemed distant from his teammates instead preferring the company of his security team.  He never talks about his family and we only meet his kids briefly in the final episodes as young adults.  A much as the series reveals about him, there's still a lot of mystery there.  But despite popping the bubble of his smiling, Looney Tunes-playing, Coke-shilling facade, he's still an endlessly captivating person.

[1:35:15]

---
Saturday Night Live operates in waves, talent comes in, talent blows up, talent gets lazy, talent leaves.  It's rare for the show to go from megawatt talent to megawatt talent without some waning in-between.  At this stage in its run, the current cast is largely long-in-the-tooth, most having been on board for more than 5 years, and the new talent, while good, are certainly not blowing up the spotlight.  The biggest buzz the show has these days is the Alec Baldwin impersonation of Trump (and the many many guest stars who come on as Trump cronies or adversaries like Robert DeNiro, Ben Stiller, or John Goodman), which unfortunately casts too much of a shadow over the main cast.  I struggle remembering faces and names at times, while of course Kate McKinnon has broken out as its current cast superstar, she's failed to transition that into successful other media as of yet.

What's kind of critical to Saturday Night Live is both it airing on Saturday night, and it being live from New York, in front of a studio audience.  Following the dire spread of COVID-19 in NYC and shutting the city down, SNL couldn't verily proceed as scheduled, could it?   I think we were all expecting SNL to just call it a season.  But they did perhaps the most daring thing they could do, which was let their talent be as creative as possible given the restrictions, and put together a show that was not broadcast live, nor recorded on a Saturday Night.

Veterans McKinnon, Aidy Bryant, Cecily Strong and new recruit Chloe Fineman easily shined, and seemed to garner more individual time than any of their co-stars, producing skits that seemed deeply personal (or in Fineman's case, as impressive show reel for the breadth of her talent). 

Tom Hanks, Brad Pitt, and Kristen Wiig were "hosts" of the three SNL at home episodes, but beyond introducing the show with a monologue and closing out the show Hanks (still recovering from his coronavirus infection) didn't do much.  Pitt portrayed Anthony Fauchi in an opening sketch, and Wiig managed to participate in a sketch or two, delivering perhaps my favourite sketch of all - Beauty Waves (in which she plays a beauty youtuber facing downward into a phone camera, flopping her hair about to increasingly absurd effect).  Oh, we also got a "What's Up With That" which is my all-time favourite recurring sketch, maybe even just for Jason Sudekis' dancing

Weekend update was the best its first week, with both Colin Jost and Michael Che seeming very loose and a little goofy.  Che piped in a small group into the feed as an "audience" to hilarious results.  Subsequent weeks got more produced and polished which takes away from the charm.  Che works best rolling with punches, not buttoned down (and losing his grandmother permitted him a great dunk on Jost).  Jost is never better than when things aren't going as planned.

It's not sustainable, SNL at Home, because it takes them away from their core conceit but it's a definite shot in the arm creatively and feels so much fresher than much of what they've been doing in recent years.  If SNL has been playing too into youtube-friendly sketches (ever since Andy Samberg and the Lonely Island crew jumped aboard), this may actually be the unexpected evolution, where SNL is pretty much all youtube sketches.  Perhaps the show will branch out into both maintaining its live Saturday night show, and it's "At Home" self-recorded skits from its very talented crew. 

It puts talent in the spotlight, gives them some much needed freedom to go a bit wilder, weirder and more personal.  Plus I loved gawking around their various houses/apartments.

[1:55:20]
---

Welcome back, Clone Wars, you'll be missed, again.
You know I love Star Wars.  I also like Star Wars.  And at times I'm not too happy with Star Wars.  When The Clone Wars first came out, I was in the "not too happy" camp.  So it took me a long, long time to get into.  About a decade or so.   Once I got into it, I had to get past the animation, which I only recently learned was designed to resemble Greek relief carvings.  That makes sense, but still, it's really wonky to look at.  By the end of Season 5 and the subsequent "lost Season" I was more or less back in "happy mode" with the franchise.

But if there's one thing I love about Clone Wars, it's Ahsoka Tano.   If it's another it's clone Captain Rex.  And this final season gives us plenty of both.  It kicks off with a 4-part arc, "The Bad Batch", which is a completed and updated version of the arc that ran in animatic form on starwars.com for a number of years.  I can see why they went with this, first given that it was almost complete already it's probably cost-efficient, plus it throws the viewer right back into the reality of the clones, and their complicated existence.

The second arc finds Ahsoka having a hard time, befriending a mechanic in the lower decks of Coruscant, only to become between sisters and get embroiled in a spice run gone wrong, and face down a nasty criminal empire.  To be honest, the arc is a little corny, and heavy handed at times, but in between its action and intrigue, it provides exposition as to Ahsoka's position in life, how she got there, and why she chooses to stay.  Together the two arcs successfully lead into the final arc of the series.

The denouement, however, is possibly the best in the entirety of this 7-season series.  Ahsoka has to face the Jedi council as Mandalor pleads for help in the wake of Maul's rule.  The council, already aware that the Sith are in their end game in the Clone War, cannot spare much but give Ahsoka Rex's battalion.  They take to Mandalor where civil war erupts, and Ahsoka faces down Maul 1-on-1.  It's epic, but that's just the beginning.  This arc dovetails with the events of Revenge of the Sith and the moments where both Maul and Ahsoka become aware of a deep disturbance in the Force are absolutely spine tingling.  It's not long before Ahsoka has to deal with a ship full of clones responding to Order 66, eliminate all Jedi.

The fight coordination is next level, one particular fight actually animated with motion capture with Ray Park reprising his physical position as Maul.  It's astounding.  As well, the score from Kevin Kiner is easily the highest watermark in the series.  Opting for something more "Tangerine Dream"rather than "John Williams" it's a wonderful deviation into synths instead of orchestral, and it works so damn well.  Where usually the music in Clone Wars is forgettable, here it adds to the weight of everything going on, it pushes everything making it feel even weightier than Revenge of the Sith itself.

These two characters from outside the film series are given the full spotlight here, knowing that they'll reemerge in Star Wars Rebels (and beyond?) but providing one hell of a story showing how they got there.  It closes out the Clone Wars admirably and gives us more of the two greatest characters in the whole pantheon.

[2:07:30]

---
The first season of Shrill gave SNL star Aidy Bryant a vehicle and a voice that seemed to be right where she felt at home.  It explored being a fat woman in modern America through the eyes of a journalist attempting to find some peace with herself as well as her place in the world.  There are a lot of systemic structures that oppress people, based on skin color, or name, gender or physical size or physical capabilities.  We're in a time where we're confronting those structures, more aggressively than ever, but also experiencing almost sinister resistance to it.  The first season felt the weight of that offensive - but not immovable - wall.

The second season picks up immediately after Annie has confronted her cyberbully and put a rock through his car window.  She's emboldened and empowered, but the reality is she tore her life up.  She chewed out her mom, quit her job, and settled down with Ryan, who treated her like absolute garbage when they were first just hooking up.  A month later, she's struggling with the fallout of her actions.  Her mom took off to Vancouver and isn't talking to anyone, she's cozying up in a love nest with Ryan to the exclusion of her friends, and she's more broke than ever with no one willing to give her a paying gig (offers of interships though) despite acknowledging her talent.

Season 2 of Shrill doesn't lighten up on the subject matter, but the show's tone has noticeably shifted.  I think the first season had some reliance up the source novel by Lindy West, but season two feels more like Bryant's comedic sensibilities coming through.  What could be awkward or tense situations are disarmed by their absurdity, and the performances are slightly broader comedically.  The addition of Jo Firestone (Joe Pera Talks To You) and some other spotlighted minor side characters who fill out the crazy world of the Register (with David Cameron Mitchell's egocentric Gabe being even more overshadowed by Patti Harrison's eccentric Ruthie) makes the world of Shrill feel well rounded, while Annie passes all focus to Fran (Lolly Adefope) for an amazing episode where they attend Fran's cousin's wedding and we get a peek into Nigerian-immigrant culture and Fran has to face down her judgemental family.

Maybe not Shrill's best moment, but certainly my favourite, finds Annie facing down her cyberbully again, trying to interview him for a story, and the dynamic between Beck Bennett and Bryant is probably as broadly comic as the series gets, almost too silly for an otherwise grounded show, but it's for a very pointed purpose, and also results in huge laughs.

I was a little intimidated to venture into Season 2 to start, hoping Annie's train-wreck life wouldn't continue down that path, but the tonal shift, the ability to put focus on other characters, and to truly show Annie's growth (as well as some very pointed commentaries, like the Natasha Lyonne-directed episode dedicated to the commercialization of feminism) made for truly remarkable programming that make me eager for season 3 (confirmed).

[2:18:17]

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

12 for 12: it's like 10 for 10 but longer

[10 for 10 12 for 12, that's 10 12 movies which we give ourselves 10 12 minutes apiece to write about.  Part of our problem is we don't often have the spare hour or two to give to writing a big long review for every movie or TV show we watch.  How about a 10 12-minute non-review full of half-remembered scattershot thoughts? Surely that's doable?   ]

You would think that stuck in quarantine I would have nothing better to do than trade reviews with Toasty every day.  To be honest, nothing would be better than that.  Alas. I still have job. I still have kids.  I still have family. I still have life to attend to even though life seems to have shut down for many.  I'm lucky, I suppose, to be so busy, but downtime would be good.  Escape would be good.  Some of these films provided a modicum of escape, some felt like a prison themselves.

In this [extended] edition:
  1. Aladdin (2019) Disney+
  2. Sword of Trust (2019) Netflix
  3. Uncut Gems (2019) Netflix
  4. Starfish (2019) Amazonprime
  5. The Phantom Thread (2017) Netflix
  6. Dark Phoenix (2019) Crave
  7. The Art of Self-Defense (2019) Crave
  8. Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) Crave
  9. The Kid Who Would Be King (2019) Crave
  10. Sleeping Beauty (1959) Disney+
  11. Tangled (2010) Disney+
  12. My Spy (2020) AmazonPrime
....und... gehen!

---

I wasn't a big fan of Disney's animated rebirth in the 90's.  It all seemed like cutesy, sing-songy, little girl shit to my edgy, nerdy teenage self at the time.  By the time I graduated to adulthood, I'd met enough women who lurrrved those films that I changed my tune, of only for their sakes.  Honestly, I still never watched them.  I think I had The Little Mermaid thrust upon me and that was quite enough.  So the original Aladdin (which I *thought* I recently covered but turns out I neglected to write about) held no special place for me.  Therefore there was no true fanboy disdain for any kind of live-action remake, but also there was absolutely zero enthusiasm.  If I gave this a shot, it's because I was once a big fan of both Will Smith and Guy Ritchie so, you know, why not.  Plus the actor playing the titular character (Mena Massoud) is a good Canadian boy, so why not show a little pride.  Plus, it's Disney+...I'm already paying for it, might as well make the best of it, right?

Anyway.  It's fine. Will Smith as the genie, well, he's no Robin Williams, but that's probably a good thing. Watching the animated Aladdin was kind of horrifying, with Williams pulling out one dusty old pop-culture reference after another.  I mean, even the parents of kids watching that film in the 90's would find those corny ass impersonations/references dated, right?  For some reason, people gave Williams a free pass for this kind of crap, because his manic energy would move so fast through these "jokes" that there wasn't time to register the corniness.  Smith, on the other hand, plays it charming, if a bit goofy, but still with heart and smoothness.  The man is still a star, and the screen really does shine brightly with him on it.

Massoud and Naomi Scott are both really, really good in their roles.  They have great chemistry and strong voices.  In fact the whole cast acquits themselves nicely bringing a cartoon to live action, grounding it with a more reality-based focus, while still playing with a heightened, animated (probably more theatrical) zip.  I would have enjoyed it far more if it wasn't a downright ghastly CGI mess.  Good lord it's an ugly, ugly, ugly film. The costuming is nice, the tangible sets, not bad at all, the fake world surrounding it was headache inducing-nightmare stuff. 

[12:54]

---

As I write this I just learned earlier in the day that this film's director, Lynn Shelton, tragically passed away.  It should have no bearing on what I have to say about the movie, but I find myself tremendously sad.  Shelton was a talented writer/director on a number of small-budget films (I'm not sure if they're classified as "mumblecore" or not) as well as episodes of great shows like The Good Place, GLOW, and Mad Men. 

Sword of Trust came to my attention via Marc Maron, whose podcast, WTF I have been listening to almost since its inception about a decade ago.  Maron has become a favourite comedian of mine since taking up the podcast, and his personal journey from junkie asshole to top-tier comedian/rehabilitated not-that-bad-a-guy has been a thoroughly enjoyable redemption story in real life.  Maron having developed a likeable on-screen persona as well in his own sitcom Maron, as well as on GLOW has made him someone I actively root for to succeed, because I know he appreciates the success and he works hard for it. 

Sword of Trust is a largely improvised movie with Maron as its co-lead with Michaela Watkins and Jillian Bell.  Watkins and Bell are a couple who inherit a sword, which they learn is a piece of...let's say...alt-right alt-history.  There's a whole underground (percolating above ground these days) reality of alt-right, alt-history that this film is exploring, that dangerous world of Civil War deniers and just, you know, flagrant racists and MAGA turds.  This sword they bring to Maron's pawn shop and the three of them, along with Maron's hapless assistant (Jon Bass) attempt to negotiate this distasteful and ugly underbelly to profit off their own stupidity.  It's a farcical romp that at times hits the heights you hope it hits, but often sits just a shade or two below mellow too often.  The third act is a real comedic gem of genuine twists and turns that make for a truly entertaining picture.

It seems that Maron and Shelton started a relationship as a result of this film and I've enjoyed hearing Maron talk about his life experiences with Shelton on the show in the past year.  They sound like two middle-age people who found a good groove with each other and were really digging it.  In the film, Shelton plays Maron's ex, a junkie who still tries to worm her way into his life, and it's perhaps my favourite part of the film, the goddamn heart that Maron's character shows, even though he knows how painful life with this woman is.  It's a great performance drawn from a director whose work I should've paid more attention to, but will rectify.

[28:42]

---

There are people who worship the ground the Safdie Brothers, directors of Uncut Gems, walk on.  I get it, they are undeniably talented.  I could not watch this film. 

I have difficulty with characters who can't see themselves for who they are, and as a result just continually dig deeper and deeper holes for themselves, eventually collapsing the ground around them, threatening to suck everyone around them in the hole with them.  Howard Ratner is such a person.  He's a jeweler in New York City catering to a high-end crowd with a sort of low-end disposition.   He's also a gambling junkie.  And I mean junkie.  He can't help himself and that the film even contemplates having us ride along with him on his journey to finding redemption with a successful bet, rather than any form of acknowledgement of his issues makes for unbearable watching.

We come into Howard's life with it already out of control.  He's fending off collection agents (the kind who bust up body parts), while wheeling and dealing famous basketball player Kevin Garnett in his office.  He has this specific uncut gem which he believes will solve all his problems, but the problem is how unaware of his problems he really is.

Navigating Howard's life is one shit-show after another, awkward and intense to the point that I had to fast forward through entire scenes to release the tension.  The Safdie Bros. certainly know what they're doing in this regard, and they draw one hell of a performance out of Adam Sandler, he's in practically every frame of the film.  But as remarkable as it all is, it's brutally difficult to watch and even more difficult to enjoy.  I admire it, certainly, it's expertly crafted, but woof, not a ride I ever want to get on again.

[38:40]

---

I wish I could remember Starfish more than I do, because the impression I have was that I liked it.  The reality is I don't really recall what happens in the film.  It's a low-budget, indie end-of-the-world type story but the specifics are almost all gone from my brain.  Off to wikipedia for a refresher, to see if that sparks some memories (of course, it also eats into my 12 minutes of review time).

Okay, no entry on wikipedia, but here's what IMDB had to tell me about the film: "A unique, intimate portrayal of a girl grieving for the loss of her best friend, which just so happens to take place on the day the world ends."

If I remember correctly, it's a real mood piece, with Virginia Gardner (Marvel's Runaways) having broken into her best friend's apartment over a restaurant following the funeral.  While there she discovers a few disconcerting things she didn't know about her friend, like a rather elaborate radio set-up and a series of cassette tapes that seem pointedly directed towards her.

The next morning she awakens to find the streets deserted, save for one person who issues a warning, and then she sees... something... a savage blur that horrifies her.  The cassettes and the radio lead her to a deeper understanding of her situation, both her literal and metaphorical situation. 

The film is full of tones and noise in place of an instrumental soundtrack, and it's a surreal mood piece for sure.  It's effective and evocative but, obviously, not quite memorable enough.  The style of the film was probably my favourite part.  It seemed modern day, but small town, stuck in the 1980's modern day... a world where the world passed it by.  It's an effective way to create surreality for sure, when the TV is an old picture tube and cassettes are still very much at its core.

I may want to watch this again some time.  Maybe let it sink in more.  I know it's a metaphor for grief, but I'm not quite sure exactly what it's saying about it...or at least I don't remember if I got it.

[50:07]

---

I was big into Paul Thomas Anderson, particularly in the 90's as one of my formative directors, and I was with him up until There Would Be Blood.  After that, I just fell behind.  Apparently The Master is another masterpiece but Inherent Vice is impenetrable.  Both seem like difficult films to sit through.  I sat on The Phantom Thread for a couple years as well, not knowing when I would be in the mood for... well, whatever it was about.  I never was clear on the fact.  For some directors, you should just trust them and see what they present.  Obviously I have issues with trusting Anderson.

But I shouldn't.  The Phantom Thread is a curious slow burn of a movie, about a respectable, well established fashion designer in (I want to say) mid-50's London.  The British-y named Reynolds Woodcock (Daniel Day-Lewis) is a man focused almost exclusively on his craft.  He takes on lovers, but they eventually leave (or rather, are dismissed) once they want more than to just fit into his routine... his very specific and established routine.  It seems like a common, and comfortable cycle for him, his romantic muses, easily discarded, until Alma (Vicky Crieps).   He meets her upcountry, a waitress, not stand-out attractive nor at all glamorous, but something strikes him very specifically about her and he woos her.  She allows herself to be wooed.

But Reynold's need for control over every aspect of his life (and that which he doesn't have control of he defers to his sister/manager Cyril - an amazing Lesley Manville) doesn't suit Alma at all, and as she begins to assert some ownership over their relationship, it causes immense strife in Reynold's life... he cannot create, he cannot function as normal. It gets to a point where he just needs this obstruction out of his life.  But she won't go, and how it plays out is twisted, poetic, kind of funny, in a weird way just, but also a little evil.

I had forgotten how subtly warped Anderson's work can be, and Day-Lewis laps up this kind of material like a cat at a milk bowl.  Crieps goes toe-to-toe with Day-Lewis, and even then, Manville still upstages them both.  These are remarkable performances.

Honestly, this feels like a film that sits right in between The Lobster and The Favourite, two films from director Yorgos Lanthanimos.  I don't know if that means Lanthanimos is cribbing hard from Anderson, or if Anderson, watching Dogtooth and the like is taking new inspiration from one of the best new(ish) directors in the game.  Either way, it's all welcome.  Time to see The Master methinks.

[1:05:07]

---
This poster...literally 10x cooler
than anything in the film

(Okay losing time, gotta speed this up)
What a fucking nothing film Dark Phoenix is.  The final film in Fox's X-Men franchise before being acquired by Disney did nothing to redeem the series after the disaster that was both X-Men: Apocalypse and the last shitty retelling of the Dark Pheonix saga in X-Men: The Last Stand.  

There's something inherently broken in these X-Men movies, yet they somehow have managed to squeak out about four or five very entertaining movies and even one watershed superhero film in Logan (I acknowledge its place in the superhero pantheon even if I don't love it because I'm not *that* invested in Wolverine).  I think it has to do with 1) needing  to have either Wolverine or Magneto or both in every film and 2) catering to the star power of the actors involved.  X-Men come an go, there's no need to keep Mystique around for a 4th FILM! As An X-Man! AS THE LEADER OF THE X-MEN!!!  What is happening?

Anyway, this film find Jean Grey (Sophie Turner getting a spotlight she *could* hold if this film knew who it's central character was) infested with the Phoenix Force.  It's done bad things, and it's now doing more bad things and Jean is out of her mind.  There's some aliens, led by Jessica Chastain, who seemingly have no stakes-raising purpose but they're here, causing trouble and manipulating Jean.  I'm still not quite clear why...whether it's revenge or to harness her power, or both?

And then Magneto for some reason has to be involved.  And the X-Men kids who were introduced in the last film, some of them anyway...Cyclops, Nightcrawler, Storm, they're all chasing after Jean but we have no real emotional investment in these people.  What does this movie want to tell us, how does it want us to feel.  It's telling a story, but for who and why?

It looks fine, everyone performs well, but it serves almost no purpose.  It's not trying to correct any mistakes from Apocalypse (except not having Bryan Singer back) and it's not propelling the X-Men forward in any logical way.  It just seems like it's biding time...and if you have time to bide, this will help you bide it, if you want.  Just don't expect to care, like, at all.

[1:17:01]

---

We all have those actors who we just don't like for whatever reason.  Maybe it was something they did in their personal life, or personally to you, or a story you heard second hand, or maybe it's just the way they act, or perhaps something about them just annoys you.  Jesse Eisenberg is easily in my top 5, perhaps even number 1 on my list of actors I can't stand to watch in movies* (*not an actual list I maintain).  It's maybe better said that he's an actor that's actively a deterrent for me to see a film.

Just something about that guy.  The way his nervous energy controls his performances in some films, but then becomes shaky smarminess in others, they're flip sides of an unpleasant coin.  But I must acknowledge he's good at those things.  He really is.  He's built more for the former than the latter, but he's good at both.  I just don't like watching it.

And yet, The Art of Self-Defense is fantastic! I loved this film, and Eisenberg was a big part of what I loved about it.  I mean the film is kind of ridiculous but Eisenberg's anxious nature totally grounds the ridiculousness, and is absolutely essential for its success.

The crux is Eisenberg plays Casey, a Jesse Eisenberg-type character who gets pushed around everywhere he goes.  One night he gets mugged.  Not just mugged but the absolute shit kicked out of him by a motorcycle/dirtbike/moped gang.  After recovering he's an even bigger wreck than before, but he finds karate, run by an alpha aggro zen master (yes, very oxymoronic) who takes a shining to him and entices him into the fold.  Over a few weeks, Casey begins to establish some self confidence (you know, like the normal type a regular person would have) but he's still a bit of a dork around everyone.  Then he's brought into the night classes and things start to spiral in very unexpected ways.

Correction.  The way they spiral out is totally expected, predictable for the most part, except if it wasn't Eisenberg.  You keep thinking this guy is way in over his head, he's never going to get out.  That's what he brings, a grounded sensibility so that the absurd remains a surprise even if expected.

This is the second feature for Riley Stearns and he shows definite control over every aspect of storytelling, from pacing and framing, to aesthetic and style.  It's so expertly crafted.  It's a strange beast, not exactly funny, but too off kilter to be dramatic.  It's kind of Charlie Kaufman-esque but more controlled in how esoteric it gets... it never quite goes too far.  I kind of loved it, in spite of myself.  And now Eisenberg has Vivarium out which looks right up my ally...I may have to reconsider my stance.

[1:33:53]

---



I was SO ready for Godzilla: King of the Monsters.  Taking what Gareth Edwards gave us in the first film, with more worldbuilding teases from Kong: Skull Island, and the promise of MONSTER FIGHTS GALORE!  I was ready.  Big budget Godzilla here we come!  There's no way this could be a let down.

Except.

Jesus.

What the hell happened here?  We're introduced at the start to Vera Farmiga (ugh, she's in the top 5 list mentioned previously) and her daughter  (Millie Bobbie Brown) at an isolated research station where she's studying the giant monsters, the kaiju, and has developed a sonar that seems to interact with them.  Then Charles Dance shows up and kidnaps them.  We don't see them again for a good long while.

Instead we meet Kyle Chandler, her estranged husband who takes photos of nature, and he's been recruited by the Monarch Group (a great assortment of actors - including Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkings, Bradley Whitford and even Thomas Middleditch) none of whom we give a crap about because the film doesn't know how to use them for anything other than exposition or speechifying.  There's so much speechifying in this damn movie.  For a film about giant monsters fighting, it's awfully tedious.

The film tries to hard to be more than what it needs to be.  It delivers the monster fights, but it doesn't know how to use them properly.  It continues to deliver us bullshit deviations from the monster fight to whatever personal human stakes there are for characters we haven' t had any reason to care about.

It's a notably expensive looking movie, and the concepts should work, but they're executed so poorly.  Monarch should be an awesome, exciting organization that we as the audience want to be a part of, that we want to be inside of, but most of the time we just want to get to the monsters because we're given nothing of interest in that world.  There's a group out to further the destruction of humanity,but they're given no real gravitas.  In the face of Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidorah and Rodan, who cares about some eco terrorists?  Well, we should but the film just expects us to hate them but we know them only about as well as the good guys.

There's an attempt at world/universe building but it comes at the expense of good characterization.  Hell, this film has O'Shea Jackson Jr. and he's treated like a glorified extra.  What a bummer of a film.  I only hope they have their shit together for Kong vs Godzilla next year (and if it is good, it's the saving grace that the studio didn't even bother to wait for the crummy box office returns and bad reviews of this one before it pushed ahead with the big crossover).

Love those Japanese posters though.

[1:48:24]

---

I was really rooting for Joe Cornish to really storm the scene with his second directorial feature.  Attack the Block was such a tremendous homage to 80's sci-fi monster horror, while also being exceptionally modern, funny, and, in its own way, magical. Add to that his predecessor work on screenplays with Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright that really showed his understanding of how to play with genre that both advances it and respects its roots, and I was certain his sophomoric effort was going to be gold.  Even after the fine but not glowing reviews for The Kid Who Would Be King came out I still hoped that there was magic that people just weren't seeing laying within.

Turns out, no, it's pretty much what was being said.  It's charming, but slight.  It's playing with Arthurian legends and transposing them into a modern setting, and it's been tried a dozen times and never ever works.  Something about Arthurian legend just seems to be box office poison no matter who is cast or how much money you throw behind it.

This one, at least, has some winning elements, with a young cast that acquits itself very very nicely.  Young Louis Ashborne Serkis (he looks like Andy Serkis's kid because he is Andy Serkis' kid) holds the lead here as Alex, a nerdy, bullied kid who is suddenly called upon by Merlin (co-played by Patrick Stewart and the marvelous Angus Imrie) to be the champion the world needs now.  Alex has a whole fantasy story about what his life should be, and about the father he never knew.  Merlin's narrative plays into this, and his quest to save the world seems aligned with his quest to find his father.

The story meanders a bit here or there and never ramps up to the grand scale adventure it really wants to be.  Cornish seems to be once again trying for an 80's genre here, a mix of "neon fantasy" and "kids adventure", like Krull mashed with The Goonies... he gets about 70% of the way there, but it just never seems to gel.  Perhaps I'm too old, or perhaps storytelling has just changed, or perhaps it's just subject matter.  If anything I think Cornish needed to add more style to the mix, something visual or maybe even audio to the whole thing to pep it up a bit. 

It's resoundingly solid kids entertainment as is, but I feel like it should be one step beyond that coming from Cornish.

[2:04:37]

---

The classic Disney animated Sleeping Beauty.  What can you say about a classic like this.  It's stunning.  It's beautiful.  The animation, isn't timeless, it's of it's time and it's perfection, the epitome of the best of its era. 

And it's dreadfully boring.

My daughter and I both fell asleep watching this fairy tale bide its time as it tries to pad out 20 minutes worth of story over its 75 minutes by way of long drawn-out sequences that lead nowhere and provide nothing but visual stimuli accompanied by the most conventional of scores.

The singing (I hesitate to even call them "songs") are anachronistic even for 1959.  It's warbling crooning that was already on the outs with kids (not that I think a Chuck Berry song would have fit any better), but it's all so lilting and stilted.

I liked some of the comedic asides, like the war over a blue or pink dress, or the king and the father of the prince his daughter is to marry having a playful duel of words that turns sour, then friendly again.  I'm not so sure about the repeated turns to the drunkard, although that kind of humour certainly had its place in Vaudeville and depression-era comedy, but it seems aberrant for '59.

I dunno man.  My daughter says that Maleficent is better than this.  But this is a classic, right?  And yet, I find myself thinking that, well, she's kind of right.  The animation is still stunning, but it's not enough.  There's zero character or relationship building here to cling to.

[2:14:37]

---

Tangled is another "classic" Disney animated movie I hadn't previously seen, because I remember that at the time it was released I was wondering why Disney was stubbing its toe on CGI animation when Pixar was already killing it.  Basically I dismissed Tangled as an also-ran.

Because it is.

But it's also very entertaining.

Had this been a Pixar release, especially coming on the heels of WALL-E and Up, I would have been tremendously disappointed.  But in a post Cars 2/Brave/Good Dinosaur world, Pixar isn't the infallible entertainment beast it once was, and Disney's original animation arm has given us Zootopia, Wreck-It Ralph and Big Hero 6 among others that are perhaps not equal to Pixar's upper tier, but certainly second-level goodness.  Tangled for sure fits on that shelf alongside them.

In fact, Tangled feels like a classic Disney princess tale for the modern (erm, previous) decade.  It's the princess Rapunzel kidnapped as a baby, kept secluded in a tower so that her wicked (and very passive agressive) mother figure can use her magic hair to keep her young.  Meanwhile the roguish thief Flynn Ryder is on the run having stolen the royal crown, when he encounters Rapunzel.  Their dynamic is fiery and feisty, with Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi bringing a delightful jauntiness to the proceedings.

There's romance, a bit of action, and a simple but worthy bit of emotional manipulation as well as a kind of great character in Maximus, a guard's horse who seems more competent and determined in the pursuit of Flynn than any human.  It's certainly got its charms and I find it far more palatable than most of the Disney princess oeuvre.

[2:23:07]

---
I'm not sold on Dave Bautista as the "charismatic leading man", even though I've been quite accepting of him as a charismatic supporting player.  He just doesn't command a scene as well as he can interrupt one. 

In My Spy, Bautista plays a badass CIA agent who, well, isn't doing his job properly when he's acting all badass.  He's on thin ice, in fact, in jeopardy of losing his job.  He's given a fairly simple assignment and given a dorky tech partner  (Kristen Schaal) who is just professionally enamored with him.  He's bored and out of his element spying on a single mom and her daughter, anticipating her dead husband's brother, the bad guy, will be reaching out to her.  Schaal wants him to train her while they're doing little but observing and reporting but he has no respect for her.

Chloe Coleman is the little girl, probably 10-ish, and an outcast at the school she's only just started attending.  She's whip-smart and finds out that there are two CIA spies watching her.  So she starts manipulating them into helping her.  Inevitably they bond, Bautista the loner and this latchkey kid.  As well, she starts attempting to set Bautista up with her mother and they both falling for it.  Yes, it's pretty much paint by numbers plotting with the only "new" being the personalities involved.

Young Coleman and Schaal basically take command of most scenes in the film.  Bautista isn't uncomfortable, but he's definitely leaning on them to keep things from falling flat.

It's almost a kid's movie but revels in violence and swearing is soooo casual that it seems like it's only accidentally a kid's movie.  Mostly it's fine. There's a few little chuckles, just as many eye rolls,  and one tiny little feel, but it's also wildly unmemorable and certainly inessential viewing.



Tuesday, November 26, 2019

10 for 10: all coughed up

[10 for 10... that's 10 consumables which we give ourselves 10 minutes apiece to write about.  Part of our problem is we don't often have the spare hour or two to give to writing a big long review for every movie or TV show we watch.  How about a 10-minute non-review full of half-remembered scattershot thoughts? Surely that's doable?   ]




In this edition:

1. Creed II - 2018, d. Steven Caple Jr. - Crave
2. Under the Silver Lake - 2019, d. David Robert Mitchell - Amazon Prime
3. The Perfect Date - 2019, d. Chris Nelson - netflix
4. Christopher Robin - 2018, d. Marc Forster  - Crave
5. Tell Me Who I Am - 2019, d. Ed Perkins - netflix
6. Hellboy - 2019, d. Neil Marshall - Amazon Prime
7. Jojo Rabbit - 2019, d. Taika Waititi - In Theatre
8. Frozen II - 2019, d. Jennifer Lee, Chris Buck - In Theatre
9. Happy Death Day 2 U - 2019, d. Christopher Landon - Crave
10. Let It Snow - 2019, d. Luke Snellin - netflix

Maybe if I didn't spend 2 1/2 hours writing about the Mandalorian I would have had more time to go into deeper thoughts about some of these...alas here I am...and here we go....
 ---

I just expressed (finally) how much I love Creed, and while Creed II is definitely missing some of what Ryan Coogler brought to it, namely the intense and incredibly accomplished tracking shots of the fight in the ring it's still a radically fun and engaging time.  Knowing that Stallone had his hand in the script, and that it was dealing with the villain from Rocky IV (that being Dolph Lundgren's Ivan Drago), I was a little worried this would be overly-Rocky focussed but, turns out those mild fears were unfounded, mainly because I forgot that Drago killed Adonis Creed's dad.  The history doesn't end there, Drago's loss wound up being detrimental to his status in Russia, and he's been in low, impoverished status since.  Meanwhile Donny is the top boxer in his class without any real challenge, so taking on the oversized, junior Drago is an exercise in humility.  Plus Donny has his first kid on the way and he and Bianca are worried her hereditary hearing loss will affect their child.  Mainly it's super fun to catch up with everyone.  Donny, like in the last movie, lets his ego get the best of him, but he learns from it.  There's a bullshit moment of tension between Rocky and Donny, but other than that it's a solid sequel.  It feels like the Creed series is going the same trajectory as the Rocky run, however, getting a little bigger, and a little more absurd with each outing.  I'm hoping the next film lets Donny's story be his own, and not so tied to Apollo or Rocky's past.

[10:19]

---

I also recently expressed my love for It Follows, David Robert Mitchell's expertly crafted modern horror.  I was curious about what his follow-up was, as it had been a few years, and was pleased to find Under the Silver Lake on Amazon Prime.  I had heard a few mixed reviews of this, sleepy, weird neo-noir, but still thought Mitchell had earned my interest with his previous effort.  Andrew Garfield stars as a bit of a shiftless layabout living in LA, his writing career having gone nowhere, and eviction always looming overhead.  He sparks up a mutual attraction with a neighbor, only for her to disappear soon after.  His understimulated thought processes go into overdrive and he goes on the hunt for the truth behind her disappearance.  Curious mysteries, hidden messages, coded songs, all these buried meanings lead him to an even bigger, weirder mystery at the heart of LA.  Mitchell is channeling David Lynch and the Coen Brothers with whimsey, weirdness, and absurd noir melodrama, peppering in heavy violence among curious slapstick.  It's certainly not an uninteresting movie, but it is a challenge if you're one who needs to know where exactly something is going, especially if that something needs to be grounded in anything approximating reality.  If I were 20 years younger, I would absolutely love this movie.  As it is, it's not derivative, but it's not cogent enough for my current tastes. There'd be a cult film here if we weren't so bombarded with content these days.  I fear it's likely to be more forgotten than found.

[21:32]

---

I've missed out on a few of Noah Centineo's Netflix teen rom coms to date, but having watched The Perfect Date, I'm kind of seeing what the fuss is about.  Centineo seems unassuming at first, but he quickly reveals himself to be a Ruffalo-esque charm machine in this film.  He sports the appearance of an insufferable douchecanoe, but he has soft eyes, a kind smile and a gentle spirit in his performance here of a guy trying to make money for college (since his writer dad has been relatively unemployed since his mom walked out on them).  His method for making money?  Hiring himself out as a stand-in (the film was originally titled "The Stand-In", and much more appropriate title) for other teens who need a fake boyfriend or +1 for whatever reason.  It's kind of a modernization of the 80's teen classic Can't Buy Me Love in a way, but mostly in premise.  Centineo's first date is with the stand-offish, sarcastic Laura Marano (playing a character that can only be called a Lizzie Caplan-type), and they spark up a no-nonsense friendship.  We can see where this is going already, and it follows the sort of rhythms you would expect, and yet it's no less sweet or enjoyable a journey.  There's not a lot of meat on these bones but a charming cast pretty much makes it worth the time.  Centineo should actually make a fine Prince Adam/He-Man should that film actually get made (I hear it's a netflix project now... turn it into an Eternia romcom and maybe they have something).

[29:42]

---

Who is Christopher Robin for?  I mean, I'm all for any film starring Ewan McGregor and Hayley Atwell, but this is supposed to be a kids film, and it's really, really maudlin.  I think we're supposed to understand that McGregor has PTSD from his time in WWII, but it's never explicit, and the funk he's in is cured by revisiting his childhood friends, which are actualized beings and not just a part of his imagination.  This movie is weird.  It's desperately trying to be Paddington but in doing so it does that thing that 80's superhero, animation, and toy movies did when they went live action, which was not believing enough in the power of the fantasy world, and having to ground things in the boring old real world.  This film did get a few laughs and more than a few tears out of me, but I'm soft like a Pooh-bear like that.  It just takes a swelling score and the eyes start watering up.  It's hard to dislike Christopher Robin, it's a sweet movie, truly, but it offers little to rave about.  Where the Paddington films are a fun roller-coaster ride, this one's more like a country drive on a gravel road.  It's just nice. It's not quite a nostalgia trip meant for parents, and it's not exuberant kiddie fare.  It falls closer to Where The Wild Things Are  than Despicable Me, that's for sure.  I suppose it's a film for the kids in SNL's "Wells For Boys" commercial.



[39:18]

---

It seems like half the documentary films out there are of the "true crime" persuasion, and even films that aren't necessarily conventional "true crime" (ie. murder/kidnapping mysteries) seem to play out in the same sort of narrative fashion and with the same kind of editing and production.  Tell Me Who I Am does fall into this same documentary narrative trap, but its story is so compelling and its resolution so emotional one can't really find fault with the style of storytelling it chose.  This is a tale told by the main players in its story, Marcus and Alex Lewis, identical twin brothers, leading parallel lives until around the age of 18 when Alex has a bad accident and loses his memory.  The only thing he knows for sure is Marcus is his brother (he doesn't even know his own name).  Alex depends on Marcus for everything, rapidly guiding him through infancy, childhood, and his teenage years as Alex has to relearn pretty much everything.  It's 15 years before Alex learns that Marcus has been editing his history lesson of their lives, things he only discovers following the death of their mother and cleaning up their parents estate.  What Marcus learns drives a wedge between the brothers, and in spite of working together and maintaining their family, there's been a wedge between them for some time.  The first act of the film presents us with Alex's view of the events, the second Marcus' view also furthers the narrative, while the third act is a very potent confrontation on screen, in front of the cameras, wherein Marcus finally reveals the extent of the abuse they suffered as children.  It's through this resolution that they both finally understand eachother's sides of the story.  Alex's life feels incomplete, dishonest, knowing that he doesn't have the memories that his brother does, and what his brother gave him is a redacted version of their past he feels keeps them distant.  Marcus, meanwhile, carries the burden of trying to give his brother a better life than they actually had by keeping the knowledge of what they went through to himself.  It was, he thought, the most precious gift he could give him, but living with that wedge between them and burying the truth was causing them both to suffer.  Marcus' on camera confession is painful, powerful and beyond brave.  In addressing the camera, he's addressing not only his brother but the audience he knows is looking on, and to reveal something so painful, not to just one person, but millions upon millions is a dramatic leap on his part.  It's a tale that's both fascinating and upsetting but it's also inspiring, with Marcus and Alex showing that trauma doesn't need to define someone, and that speaking out against abuse is meaningful and powerful.

[54:37]

---
This poster is far better than anything
in the film

I don't remember the last time I turned off a film and didn't return to it.  I was warned about Hellboy, warned that it wasn't worth my time, and it turns out all those people who warned me were absolutely right.  I liked Guillermo Del Toro's first Hellboy entry, the second one left me wanting.  This one feels like a direct-to-youtube cosplay abomination.  I can't think of a better replacement for Ron Perlman as Hellboy than David Harbor, and yet the make-up and wardrobe they give Harbor is ghastly.  It looks ill-fitting, with a disgusting-looking weave of hair on his head and arms and back.  He's wickedly unappealing to look at, something you want to see only in flashes and quickly dead, not the lead of a 2 hour movie.  The tone of the film feels off entirely.  It's meant to be pithy and light, but it moves far too quickly from moment one to ever settle into it.  The first 20 minutes bombard the audience with back story for both the villain and Hellboy, and neither are given time to breathe or rest to gain any weight within the film.  It's a constant sprint to the next thing, then the next thing, then the next thing.  It's exhausting.  It wouldn't be so bad if it weren't shot so poorly, or if the effect didn't look like video game cut scenes.  It's not a film of bad ideas, just bad execution.  One misstep after another after another.  It shouldn't be unwatchable, but it kind of is.  I really didn't like the 45 minutes I spent in Neil Marshall's vision of Hellboy, not one bit.  And I tried, I tried to look for something I liked, and I couldn't.  There was a sliver of salvation in Harbor, but under all that grotesque latex and paint it was too much to wade through to stay with it.  I'm not going back.

[1:03:31]

---

Jojo Rabbit is the kind of movie I should have more thoughts on, but I don't really.  I've listened to quite a few podcasts and read quite a few reviews and, for the most part, I don't really have any contention with anything anyone is saying about this film.  Sweet and charming? Sure?  Ill-advised and manipulative? Maybe.  Sloppy and redundant? Fine.  Heartwarming and heartbreaking?  Yeah.  It's those things.  Any film that deigns to make comedy out of Nazis has its work cut out for them, but Waititi seemingly laughs in the face of challenges such as these.  Waititi doesn't generally delve into wistfulness and whimsy like he does here, it's pretty cute by a mile, and it's very cheeky at times.  It's not trying to be clever about anything, it seems like he's mostly having a good time with a youthful story of love, loss and making Nazis look foolish.  Those foolish Nazis include Sam Rockwell, Alfie Allen, Rebel Wilson and Stephen Merchant.  Rockwell is in some of his best form here, playing a mid-ranking apathetic Nazi clearly in a romantic relationship with Allen.  His barely-there belief in the cause doesn't make him sympathetic or any less complicit, it does make him funny.  Of course, Waititi also plays Adolph Hitler in this film... or, rather what a 10-year-old boy drenched in propaganda thinks he is.  And in that portrayal he's a total buffoon.  If there's a point to the film, beyond just it's touching drama, it's that Nazis suck, and they're pretty dumb too.  It's not the most profound message, but it does bear repeating.

[1:13:22]

---

What did I think of the original Frozen?  Enh, it's fine.  I think I cooled on it after being repeatedly subjected to the film and its soundtrack by my daughter who thankfully moved on from it into Star Wars and superheroes long before other girls her age did.  I count myself lucky that I've not really had to watch the film in about 5 years.  So going to Frozen 2, I kind of knew how I would feel about it, which was a kind of apathy mixed with mild curiosity.  The earliest trailer kind of poised Elsa as a superhero in this Nordic land that's fantastical in very restrained ways.  I was into it.  But subsequent trailers put the focus back on goofy hi-jinks of Olaf and songs that sound like typical songs from these things, and I was left only with fleeting optimism that something awesome would be happening.  Hot Take: nothing all that awesome really happens.  Frozen 2 has its moments of beautiful animation, but compared to the tranquility and beauty of How To Train Your Dragon 3 this is the dog's breakfast regurgitated.  The songs are forgettable, but there's one that sounds suspiciously like it's trying to be a Peter Cetera song, and I was into it.  They even animated it like an early 80's music video with odd split screens and cheesy effects.  But it didn't fit the movie very well, and even at this point I'm wondering who that's for?  It's an aged out reference for most parents of today.  Beyond that, the story really features no antagonist, other than the unknown.  If there is a villain, its the sins of ancestry.  There's elemental forces at play that Elsa has unlocked and she needs to discover the mystery behind it, in order to save their home, the forest and stuff.  But it's a weird adventure that keeps splitting people apart.  There's a lot of sort-of funny missed opportunities as Kristoff keeps missing his opportunity to propose, that leads to an absolutely novice screenwriting misunderstanding.  The film threatens to permanently eliminate Elsa, Olaf and their town of Arendell, but it chickens out of any of them for a feel-good ending.  It introduces a whole new cast of supporting characters but does next to nothing with them.  Its grand adventure is wildly anticlimactic.  This just isn't great.  It's not terrible...a film doesn't *have* to have an antagonist, but it generally helps. Here they're fighting against unknown future and make right their ancestral past, and while maybe they're important steps in Ana and Elsa's history and character growth, it does not make for a very exciting movie.  This should have been a direct to Disney+ thing.

[1:28:21]

---

Oh man, I loved Happy Death Day, and I was sooooper excited for Happy Death Day 2U to finally make it to whatever streaming or subscription service it would first wind up on (I only got to HDD this summer so the sequel was already out of theatres by that point).  With anticipation high, and excitement a bit feverish, I tore into it the first opportunity I could, and ... it's ok.  Jessica Rothe is still amazing as Tree in the film, but it lost a lot of its internal logic in this second outing.  Here, we find out the source of what caused Tree to reboot her day over and over again, when side character Ryan (Phi Vu) from the first film starts living a time loop at the beginning of this one, because he and some friends are working on a comic-book-science experiment attempting to slow time (but causing time to loop instead).  A malfunction of this machine kicks Tree into an alternate dimension where she's time looping again and things are just a little bit different.  The good: the film takes its time to invest in Tree's emotional state, further developing her character.  The bad: so many gaps in logic, like how Tree wastes so much time killing herself over an over again to accelerate the reboot and hopefully get closer to a solution, even though the kills, and method of kills, seems to be doing her some real harm.  I get it's supposed to be slapstick, but slapstick doesn't play well when backed by real consequences.  I think the film missed an opportunity to stick with Ryan rebooting his day over and over and needing Tree as mentor to take him through it.  Where the first film was a winking dark comedy with slasher elements, this one is almost a straight up comedy with doses of sci-fi, and only the minutest aspect of the slasher horror film Blumhouse keeps trying to sell them as.  It's enjoyable but messy, and not up to the quality of its predecessor.
[Toast's take: we almost agree!]
[1:37:30]

---

Over the past couple years, other networks and streamers have noticed the popularity of the Hallmark Channel's "Countdown to Christmas" festivities where they dole out dozens of brand new, cheaply and quickly made romance/romantic comedy movies centered around Christmas, and in response there are new alternative Hallmark-style movies in the offing.  Netflix entered the game timidly last year with a couple entries, but this year they seemed to have stepped it up even more.  Let It Snow was released in between a couple of these Netflix-ified holiday rom coms, but it's not at all like that.  This is a legit high-school rom com starring a high-calibre cast of young, good looking actors in an ensemble film that is more a younger, updated Love Actually than your average cheesy, corny Hallmark fare.  The other thing about it is, it's a damn good movie.  It's not a good movie stacked up against other Hallmark types, it's a straight up damn good movie, sitting easily on the best of genre list other landmark high school romantic comedies like Sixteen Candles, Some Kind of Wonderful, Easy A and even the non romcom fun high school flicks like Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Mean Girls, or Superbad (and recent entrants Ladybird and Booksmart).  I enjoyed this immensely.  Every storyline was fantastic, I was fully invested, in each of them.  I think maybe Jacob Batalon (Ned from the recent Spider-Man franchise) had the lowest stakes (throwing a good party, getting noticed as a DJ) but in the end even he gets something valuable out of it all.  This is a good-spirited film, with real, honest-to-God comedy, and charming leads with actual chemistry like Shameik Moore (Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse), Kiernan Shipka (Sabrina The Teenage Witch) and Isabela Moner (Dora The Explorer).  Joan Cusak is sort of the spirit guide of the film and, having just seen her relegated to a tedious side character in Hallmark's not-great-but-not-the-worst 2015 The Christmas Train, a performance both reigned in and phoned in, it's nice to see her giving a crap and in a good movie, one with real snow and production values.  I'll be watching this one over and over again.

(Confessional time... I love watching Hallmark movies, and only in a semi-ironic way.  They're insipidly terrible by-and-large, and yet they're captivating in their chaste formulae.  The fun is in seeing the little differences between them, and finding ones which are almost legitimately entertaining.  They're like most Saturday Night Live sketches, if they had time to refine them some of them would be a lot but most of them are just disposable dross you can forget about immediately afterward.  I don't review Hallmark movies here (or anywhere), but maybe I should start?)

[1:54:46]
---FIN---