Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate it | {Insert Appropriate Seasonal Greeting Here}

[kihei]

It's Not Me (2024) Directed by Leos Carax 8C

Leos Carax, one of the most original, outrageous and just plain "out there" directors currently working in film, was asked by the Pompidou Museum to reply in images to the question "Where are you at, Leos?". The proposed art exhibition never took place, but It's Not Me was Carax's response to the request, a cinematic self portrait. Only about 41 minutes long, the essay/memoir traverses his career and comments visually and creatively on the state of the world and Carax's place in it. The movie reminded me greatly of Jean Luc Godard's Goodbye to Language, which it closely resembles to the extent one could almost mistake It's Not Me for a Godard film. As in Goodbye to Language, Carax creates an extended montage of images from his own works, from classic works of cinema, from news footage and so on, including footage of his young daughter from his cell phone. This stunner collage of visuals is interspersed by brightly-coloured images of written words and phrases on the screen, a favourite Godard move. While It's Not Me is abstract, it never seems random. One does get a sense of Carax's attitudes and feelings about what a mess the world is right now. Plus, for me, with one devestating exception, the captivating flow of the montage was just a whole bunch of fun to watch, art for art's sake in the purest most pleasurable sense imaginable. I was disappointed when it ended; I wanted more. These days, how often can you say that about a movie? It is rare to experience a work of art on such a non-verbal level, to just let it inhabit you for its running time, and, then, think about how well it was executed later. And anybody who can out-Godard Godard at his own game gets a tip of the cap from me.

subtitles


Best of '24 so far

1. Flow, Zilbalodis, Latvia
2. Anora, Baker, US
3. Caught by the Tides, Jia, China
4. All We Imagine as Light, Kapadia, India
5. It’s Not Me, Carax, France
6. Nosferatu, Eggers, US
7. Green Border, Holland, Poland
8. Do Not Expect Too Much from the End of the World, Jude, Romania
9. Bird, Arnold, UK
10. The Seed of the Sacred Fig, Rasoulof, Germany

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I liked it, but didn't love it. I wonder if I would have liked it more if, oddly enough, it had two less famous actors in it. I think this might be a case where the sheer star power and charisma of Loren and Mastroianni overshadowed what was a fairly modest exercise. (I didn't have this problem in the three other movies that I saw in which they co-starred).

Not the case for me here. I think they both do great. It's the material the problem. It's a case of more should be more, but isn't. There's a lot of stuff pointing to a faulty system, but the film remains almost anecdotal. It's not a problem in itself, I just would have liked what's on hand to be used in building something more "significant" (I have a hard time translating that word).

I have a similar problem with Eggers' Nosferatu. More on that later (I'm watching a few more Draculas and thinking of maybe posting a thread to collect comments on vampire movies ).

 

[kihei]

Babygirl (2024) Directed by Helena Reijn 4B

Romy, a highly successful CEO (Nicole Kidman), finds she is attracted to a young intern who has started to work for her company. He quickly discovers something about her that she already knows but has not yet admitted to herself: she likes to be told what to do. They start a torrid affair where she allows herself to become almost completely subservient to his wishes, sexual and otherwise. It is definitely a brave performance for Kidman who finds her character in no shortage of compromising positions. About half of the way through, though, I began to wonder just where director Helena Reijn was going with this, a narrative that would be deemed highly offensive if directed by a man. There is an attempt to force a sort of feminist take on the ending, something like women can have their kinks, too, but that doesn't mean they won't eventually learn to deal with them--not just anybody is going to be allowed to push Romy around. Seemed like a pretty weak sauce ending given the story up to that point, one that ignored no shortage of troubling questions. Director Helena Reijn in an interview suggested that the movie is a warning about the long-term side effects of the repression of a woman's sexual desires. While that kind of makes sense, that notion didn't occur to me while I was watching the film, and it probably wouldn't have occurred to me at all if I had not happened upon Reijn's interview. One thing I know for sure, French director Catherine Breillat does this sort of thing a whole lot better.

 

[kihei]

YES!!!! Flow wins the Golden Globe for best animated film.

 

[Osprey]

YES!!!! Flow wins the Golden Globe for best animated film.

Incredible! Someone watched the Golden Globes?

 

[kihei]

Incredible! Someone watched the Golden Globes?

Needed Ricky badly.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Nightbitch and The Substance. I watched The Substance a few weeks back. i don't think I wrote anything about here (I suppose I could search, but I'm lazy). One of my great movie going regrets is that I did not catch that in a theater because i would have loved to have seen the reactions of folks to the gloriously gross gonzo last 30 minutes of that which would have further elevated a movie I already quite enjoyed. If you want film to provoke reactions ... this certainly does that, quite possibly physical ones. As a fan of David Cronenberg and the movie Society there wasn't anything here I hadn't seen before but I haven't seen it mainstreamed (and publicly embraced) as much as The Substance managed to do it.

I put on NIghtbitch this weekend and was immediately struck by the parallels to The Substance. Both are body horror stories written and directed by women about very women-specific issues. One is motherhood, the other is aging and societal beauty demands. Both anchored by "brave" perfomances from beautiful women being really willing to ugly themselves up to make apoint. Beyond that both are unabashedly unsubtle about their beliefs and message, a fact that I've seen both criticized for but honestly didn't bother me one bit.

I'm trying to interrogate why it didn't bother me versus something like the "serious" movies of Adam McKay whose unsubtlety makes me want smash my head against a brick wall until I become a puddle of bloody mush. Perhaps it is because I am not a woman or mother so maybe I feel like I'm learning something (even if it's something I was aware of) whereas with McKay I am somewhat similarly liberal minded and he leaves me feeling like I am a choir member who has been berated for two hours for reasons I do not fully understand. It's like the Wire season 5 problem ... where critics (many of whom worked at newspapers at some point) gave the first four seasons high marks for perceived versimilitude on institutions like police, politics and schools, but were suddenly like "wait, that's not how newspapers work" when the show targeted the institution they knew. Outsiders versus insiders.

Or maybe it's just a simple matter of style. Nightbitch and The Substance have it, others don't. Both are funny too with Nightbitch running on this deadpan pitch and The Substance milking extremity for awkward laughs. And, frankly, Nightbitch is a funny title. It's all right there. We don't have to over think this.

Adams gives a great performance as a stay-at-home mom at ends. She's not just stressed or frazzled she may indeed be turning into a dog ... a monster ... a beast ... Her internal trauma manifesting in a physical transformation. (I hope Cronenberg was amused!). I saw some pushback on this exact aspect of the movie, but I'm not going out on a limb to say that aspect is the point. Otherwise we're left with Amy Adams just being stressed about motherhood. I liked the layering of genre on top of that. Again, not subtle in the least, but effective.

Wouldn't make any best of list, but I definitely enjoyed and appreciated it.

If Cronenberg can do it, why can't Marielle Heller and Coralie Fargeat?

 

[Pink Mist]

For All Mankind (dir. Al Reinert, 1989)

There’s something profoundly moving about For All Mankind. Al Reinert doesn’t just document the Apollo missions; he transforms them into a poetic ode to humanity's boundless curiosity and ingenuity. Rather than focus on technical details or individual astronauts, the film creates a seamless narrative of a singular, collective journey—one where the lines between “me” and “we” dissolve, and humanity as a whole takes a giant leap.

What sets this apart from other space documentaries is its hypnotic, dreamlike quality. NASA’s archival footage is presented with a breathtaking beauty that borders on the surreal: the fragile Earth suspended in the inky black of space, the stark alien landscapes of the Moon, and the mundane yet extraordinary moments of astronauts floating in zero gravity. Reinert’s choice to forego traditional narration in favor of using the astronauts’ own voices makes the experience feel intimate and personal, as though they’re confiding in you their awe, fear, and humor.

Brian Eno’s ambient score is the perfect companion to this celestial journey, adding an ethereal layer that transcends the screen. His music evokes the sublime, the infinite, and the deeply human emotions tethered to exploration. It’s not just a soundtrack—it’s the heartbeat of the film.

For All Mankind captures the sheer wonder of looking at our home planet from the vastness of space. It reminds us of our smallness and, paradoxically, our greatness. It’s a film that doesn’t just recount history; it invites you to feel the weightlessness of floating beyond Earth’s atmosphere and the deep introspection of staring back at the blue marble we all share.

This isn’t just a documentary about space—it’s a love letter to what we’re capable of when we dare to dream big. An essential watch for anyone who’s ever looked up at the stars and wondered.

 

[kihei]

Vermiglio (2024) Directed by Maura Delpiero 7A

In a remote village nestled in the northern Italian Alps at the end of World War II, two army deserters, one a stranger, wait for the conflict to end. Most, though not all of the villagers, support their presence, but in ways small and large, the stranger especially will have an effect on all their lives that none of them could foresee. Vermiglio is an absolutely gorgeous film to watch, especially the winters scenes. Director Maura Delpiero provides an intimate portrait of the villagers, with the focus on members of a sprawling family whose values and traditions seem to go back generations. In some ways, Vermiglio is a throwback to works like The Night of the Shooting Stars (Taviani brothers) and Jean de Florette and Manon of the Spring (Claude Berri), movies that managed to make compelling stories out of the complexity of life in small rural villages. A lot of what make these movies work is just good old-fashioned story telling which I find a pleasure to give myself over to for a couple of hours. In addition to a family history worth understanding, Vermiglio has cogent things to say about the Catholic Church and its relationship to patriarchy and the often overbearing importance of male pride. Every year, some movies come forward that are just unheralded pleasures, and Vermiglio is one of them this year.

subtitles


Best of '24 so far

1. Flow, Zilbalodis, Latvia
2. Anora, Baker, US
3. Caught by the Tides, Jia, China
4. All We Imagine as Light, Kapadia, India
5. It’s Not Me, Carax, France
6. Nosferatu, Eggers, US
7. Green Border, Holland, Poland
8. Do Not Expect Too Much from the End of the World, Jude, Romania
9. Vermiglio, Delpiero, Italy
10. Bird, Arnold, UK

 

[kihei]

Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl (2024) Directed by Merlin Crossingham and Nick Park 7A

In youth it is easy to embrace absolutist positions. Like, in my case, if someone thought The Who in concert wasn't great, they were dead to me. Such people simply couldn't be trusted or, even, tolerated. As one grows older, such rigid opinions soften considerably. Still, if there is someone out there who isn't charmed by the Wallace and Gromit series, at a minimum I would avoid them at cocktail parties. Aardman Animations lovable pair--the eccentric, more than slightly daft inventor and his loyal, highly resourceful dog--are back and so is their arch-enemy Feathers McGraw , a penguin who happens to be one of the great criminal masterminds of our time (pictured above disguised as a chicken). The plot with its wonderful stop motion and clay animation centres on McGraw's notions of vengeance and a really big diamond. As usual Wallace's crazy inventions, this time house-cleaning, no-job-is-too-small garden gnomes, get the pair into big trouble, and Gromit has to figure a way out of it. Safe to say that he is once again up to the challenge. Despite being an almost minimalist creation free of notable facial features, Feathers is amazingly expressive in his way and very funny. As always the humour is supported by no shortage of visual. and verbal puns and the plot moves right along charmingly and effortlessly. I wouldn't say this installment reaches the heights of Curse of the Were-Rabbit but it is pretty damn close.

Netflix

 

[Hippasus]

This is a very nicely done mini-documentary about Werner Herzog. I have not seen any of his films, but I've seen a couple interviews with him as well as some videos such as this one. This video concerns the attitude of documentarian towards nature by way of contrast between Herzog's Fire of Love and Grizzly Man.

 

[Arizonan God]

Nightbitch and The Substance. I watched The Substance a few weeks back. i don't think I wrote anything about here (I suppose I could search, but I'm lazy). One of my great movie going regrets is that I did not catch that in a theater because i would have loved to have seen the reactions of folks to the gloriously gross gonzo last 30 minutes of that which would have further elevated a movie I already quite enjoyed.

I had the privilege of experiencing exactly this. Couple next to me; the wife leaves looking visually upset about an hour in. 5 minutes later, husband gets a text, sighs and gets up. They don't return. Got a good kick out of that.

 

[Arizonan God]

I'm not sure what took me so long, but I finally got around to seeing Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut a few nights ago, and I can't remember the last time a film has stuck around in my brain so much after watching. There is so much to chew on and debate - what is the movie supposed to be about? I mean, of course there is the obvious answer, monogamy, sexuality, desire. But I find myself thinking about what else can be taken from it, commentary on class, gender relations, objectification.

Of course, there is also the element of the occult, secret societies, etc that sadly dominate the online discourse about this film, with many thinking Kubrick made the film as some sort of "expose" of the elites, although I find that difficult to believe as this is a rather faithful adaptation of a novel, and it's not as if the elites spending their time doing all sorts of nefarious sexual activities was a novel concept in 1999 - this trope dates back to at least Ancient Rome. To me, this segment of the film works on a different level - a symbolic point of Tom Cruise's trip down the rabbit hole that shows him how truly out of his depth he is, both in terms of class/status and understanding of human sexuality.

I can't wait to give this another watch, but right now it's sitting in my brain as a masterpiece, and my favourite from Kubrick of what I've seen.

10

 

[Chairman Maouth]

A true crime Canadian cops and robbers story... and it ain't bad.

Bandit (2022)

Cast

Josh Duhamel as Gilbert Galvan Jr. a.k.a Robert Whiteman
Mel Gibson as Tommy Kay
Elisha Cuthbert as Andrea Hudson
Nestor Carbonell as John Snydes

Wiki:
"Bandit is a 2022 Canadian biographical crime film directed by Allan Ungar and starring Josh Duhamel, Elisha Cuthbert, Nestor Carbonell and Mel Gibson. The film is based on the true life story of Gilbert Galvan Jr (also known as The Flying Bandit), who still holds a record for the most consecutive robberies in Canadian history. The screenplay by Kraig Wenman is largely based on interviews and accounts featured in the 1996 true crime book The Flying Bandit by Robert Knuckle and Ed Arnold."

Josh Duhamel is outstanding in the lead role, and Mel Gibson still has "it" as the first supporting actor. His screen presence is huge. He is a damn fine actor. It would be unfair to the other cast members to suggest that Gibson's acting towers over the others because they all did a stellar job. It's just that Gibson is a tier above. Gibson is Gretzky to their Lemieux. Calgarian Elisha Cuthbert also shows her acting chops. She doesn't phone it in and her acting is on the same level or better than her fellow cast members.

The Bandit is an actual living person who while based in Ontario, would fly on Air Canada to different Canadian cities to rob various bank branches and jewelry stores around the country. That's where Mel Gibson comes in. He fences the Bandit's stolen items for him.

More from Wiki:
"Galvan's method was to wear a disguise, carry a weapon (which he never fired during any of the robberies), and pass a note to a teller. Galvan robbed banks in every Canadian province except Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland. His takes ranged from $600 cash in his first robbery to $1.2 million in jewelry in Vancouver. His thefts totalled $251,333 in cash and more than $2 million in jewelry. Galvan was dubbed the Flying Bandit by Canadian media during his crime spree robbing banks and jewelry stores."

Bandit is well acted, well directed and well edited, and the plot is driven by the kind of character we all root for — the lovable villain — the otherwise normal guy just like you or me, but who happens to be one of the most prolific armed robbers in history. He did things his way.

There is even a scene between the two main characters late in the film when your heart may skip a beat or two, and a slight tear comes to your eye. Mel Gibson also plays a lovable villain. It must be because the villains are Canadians.

Is Bandit on the same level as "Heat" or "Se7en"? Nope. But that doesn't mean you'll feel like you wasted a couple of hours watching it. You could also learn a little Canadian history, even if some liberties in regard to historical accuracy are taken by the filmmakers. Bandit is a film made by Canadians for people everywhere, and you should have an enjoyable couple of hours watching it. Hell, even Canadian Music Hall of Fame band Trooper checks in when their iconic sports arena anthem "Raise a Little Hell" suddenly kicks open the doors to an early scene.

Watch it. You'll like it. Support Canadian filmmaking and business.

Epilogue: They made the stunf***ing ugliest cars in the '80s.

I believe Bandit is available on Netflix and Apple TV.

 

[Hippasus]

The following post/video may be a spoiler. This is a good criticism of a movie, but perhaps one that leans towards a theistic interpretation. I question whether this video's author gave sufficient credence to the dog-eat-dog world. As he himself says, life, at least in part, depends on the consumption of life.

 

[Hippasus]

I'm not sure what took me so long, but I finally got around to seeing Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut a few nights ago, and I can't remember the last time a film has stuck around in my brain so much after watching. There is so much to chew on and debate - what is the movie supposed to be about? I mean, of course there is the obvious answer, monogamy, sexuality, desire. But I find myself thinking about what else can be taken from it, commentary on class, gender relations, objectification.

Of course, there is also the element of the occult, secret societies, etc that sadly dominate the online discourse about this film, with many thinking Kubrick made the film as some sort of "expose" of the elites, although I find that difficult to believe as this is a rather faithful adaptation of a novel, and it's not as if the elites spending their time doing all sorts of nefarious sexual activities was a novel concept in 1999 - this trope dates back to at least Ancient Rome. To me, this segment of the film works on a different level - a symbolic point of Tom Cruise's trip down the rabbit hole that shows him how truly out of his depth he is, both in terms of class/status and understanding of human sexuality.

I can't wait to give this another watch, but right now it's sitting in my brain as a masterpiece, and my favourite from Kubrick of what I've seen.

I love Kubrick's films, but this is one for which I had zero interpretation.