Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Movie-mber Edition

[kihei]

Black Sabbath (1963) Directed by Mario Bava 5A

Black Sabbath is a horror movie with three separate stories. The first deals with an act of revenge that is not as straight-forward as it looks; the second tells the sad tale of a 19th century family that has to deal with a "wordulak," a sort of zombie/vampire combo that has taken over the dead body of their father (Boris Karloff, no less);; and the third focuses on a nurse in early 20th century who steals a ring off the dead body of an old medium who she is preparing for burial. I read some reviews afterwards, and, unbelievably to me, some people found this movie scary, or parts of it anyway. To me what made the movie fun (to a degree) weren't the scares, but the presentation. Black Sabbath is shot in very rich technicolor, stars some pretty bad actors (in both senses of the term), has its women running around in negligees or low-cut blouses, moves happily right along, and is as enjoyably cheesy as a Gruyere fondue. It's good Saturday matinee material (assuming at least a few people remember Saturday matinees ), a full grade above the British Hammer horror films which are cut from similar cloth but less imaginative. Black Sabbath is my first Mario Bava film, and I would like to see a better example of his work. This one is at the bottom of my fun scale, but at least it got that far.

subtitles

YouTube

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Black Sabbath (1963) Directed by Mario Bava 5A

Black Sabbath is a horror movie with three separate stories. The first deals with an act of revenge that is not as straight-forward as it looks; the second tells the sad tale of a 19th century family that has to deal with a "wordulak," a sort of zombie/vampire combo that has taken over the dead body of their father (Boris Karloff, no less);; and the third focuses on a nurse in early 20th century who steals a ring off the dead body of an old medium who she is preparing for burial. I read some reviews afterwards, and, unbelievably to me, some people found this movie scary, or parts of it anyway. To me what made the movie fun (to a degree) weren't the scares, but the presentation. Black Sabbath is shot in very rich technicolor, stars some pretty bad actors (in both senses of the term), has its women running around in negligees or low-cut blouses, moves happily right along, and is as enjoyably cheesy as a Gruyere fondue. It's good Saturday matinee material (assuming at least a few people remember Saturday matinees ), a full grade above the British Hammer horror films which are cut from similar cloth but less imaginative. Black Sabbath is my first Mario Bava film, and I would like to see a better example of his work. This one is at the bottom of my fun scale, but at least it got that far.

subtitles

YouTube

It's been quite a while, but as far as I remember, that third sketch is considered as some of his best work. Black Sunday also has quite a reputation as a horror classic. I'm not a huge fan of Bava, but Bay of Blood and Planet of the Vampires were both highly influential films. As for my favorite, maybe Kill, Baby, Kill or Blood and Black Lace.

Shock is IMO his most effective horror film, but it's still a little cheesy. There's no denying he's been a very important horror director, with influence way out of the genre, but his films are pretty thin.

 

[Osprey]

Black Sabbath (1963) Directed by Mario Bava 5A

Black Sabbath is a horror movie with three separate stories. The first deals with an act of revenge that is not as straight-forward as it looks; the second tells the sad tale of a 19th century family that has to deal with a "wordulak," a sort of zombie/vampire combo that has taken over the dead body of their father (Boris Karloff, no less);; and the third focuses on a nurse in early 20th century who steals a ring off the dead body of an old medium who she is preparing for burial. I read some reviews afterwards, and, unbelievably to me, some people found this movie scary, or parts of it anyway. To me what made the movie fun (to a degree) weren't the scares, but the presentation. Black Sabbath is shot in very rich technicolor, stars some pretty bad actors (in both senses of the term), has its women running around in negligees or low-cut blouses, moves happily right along, and is as enjoyably cheesy as a Gruyere fondue. It's good Saturday matinee material (assuming at least a few people remember Saturday matinees ), a full grade above the British Hammer horror films which are cut from similar cloth but less imaginative. Black Sabbath is my first Mario Bava film, and I would like to see a better example of his work. This one is at the bottom of my fun scale, but at least it got that far.

subtitles

YouTube

I wanted to watch that a few months ago and gave up trying to find a decent copy of the English version. Only the Italian version seems to be restored and in anything close to HD quality. I tried watching that with the English audio, but that didn't work because the versions are different, especially in the order of the stories. Of course, I don't mind foreign languages and subtitles, but this appears to have been filmed in English and not hearing Karloff's distinctive voice, because he was dubbed over in Italian, takes some of the fun and reason for watching out of it. Maybe I'm too much of a stickler and should just watch it, anyways.

Edit: It was a little better than I expected (or feared). I'd give it a 5/10, as well. It was, as it displayed on screen at the end, "fine" .

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Watched Ford vs. Ferrari. I'm not an auto racing enthusiast but I enjoyed the nuts and bolts of the story. 7/10.

 

[nameless1]

Stray Dog (1949) Directed by Akira Kurosawa 9A

I somehow never got around to seeing this movie before, and I really enjoyed it. Simple story line but, it turns out, with profound implications. Murakami (Toshiro Mifune), a rookie cop in Tokyo, loses his gun to a pickpocket on a crowded trolley, and then, crestfallen, spends the rest of the movie trying to find it. Stray Dog is like the ultimate police procedural before police procedurals existed. Along the way Murakami acquires Sato (Takashi Shimura), a very savvy veteran partner. The ramifications that come about in the wake of the stolen weapon gain ever growing importance, consequences about which the young cop feels desperately responsible. A simple act of carelessness ends up costing lives. The movie actually appears to acquire weight as it goes along, so that what starts out as a modest story becomes instead an important tale fraught with social and moral implications. A young Mifune is something to behold: fit, athletic, graceful, very handsome, and just radiating charisma effortlessly. But really director Akira Kurosawa is the star of this movie. His camera movement and editing are so incredibly fluid. He is the exact polar opposite of his contemporary equal in Japanese cinema, Yasujiro Ozu who almost never moved his camera (like, a total of three times in two movies, say--he brilliantly communicated movement through editing and camera placement, though). Kurosawa's technique isn't just for show either as it really lends punch and flavour to the story telling which involves the lives of people near the bottom of Japan's social strata. I doubt I will go three months without watching Stray Dog again.

subtitles

Criterion Channel

I have it at 8/10. For any other director, a movie of this caliber would probably be considered to be one of his or her best work, but in the case of Kurosawa, it is only one of his minor classics. The man is simply one of the greatest filmmakers of all-time, and he is on another level.

Personally, Ikiru is my pick for his Kurosawa's first masterpiece. Thus, for this film, along with Drunken Angels and Rashomon, they are made when Kurosawa is on the cusp of greatness. He knows what he wants, as demonstrated by the interesting and sympathetic characters, very tight story, and superb camerawork that he will become renown for in his later works, but I feel that he still has not completely found and established his own unique voice and style. As a result, even though I am invested in the story, I am not as emotionally moved as I am by his other films.

Strangely, my favourite part of the movie is actually the various backdrops of post-war Tokyo the camera captures as Mifune's character travels through the various part of the city. In a way, it serves as a valuable time capsule of what Tokyo looks like shortly after the war. While there are the expected scenes of poverty and shoddy houses, I am actually surprised to see the large mansions that Mifune's character passes by. Even in a city ravaged by bombs, there is still a rich and poor divide.

 

[kihei]

Zero for Conduct (1931) Directed by Jean Vigo 7A

There are a handful of short films that for one reason or another have gained a niche in cinema history as seminal works--Trip to the Moon; Un Chien Andalou; The Great Train Robbery; Battleship Potemkin; Meshes of the Afternoon; La Jetee; Night and Fog, for example. Released close to the dawn of the sound era, Zero for Conduct is one of these films. However, I was surprised when I was re-watching it how long it took me to understand why it was important until the movie itself makes its status obvious. The film starts as a celebration of youthful exhilaration that turns into a lyrical anti-bourgeois paean to anarchy and freedom, the very spirit of revolution. In other words, it's very French. Zero for Conduct focuses on a large group of middle school boys and their relationship with their teachers in their school. Touches of surrealism underscore the attitudes of the boys to authority--a pencil drawing comes briefly to life, the principle is played by a small person with a beard; pomposity is lampooned with vigor. The film ends with a gloriously chaotic pillow fight. Basically, Zero for Conduct is a short (44 minutes), pithy anti-authoritarian statement about freedom that uses film exuberantly to make its point. Yes, it seems dated now, but it is still worth a look.

subtitles

YouTube

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Closely Watched Trains (1966) - 7/10

Weird little Czech film which has a sardonic feel with some Wes Anderson-esque dialogue while looking like it was shot in the 50s.

Once Upon A Time In Anatolia (2011) - 7.5/10

I think it's a bit weird at the start in terms of how dejected and down the film is without that cynicism feeling earned in the characters' faces but it settles into a nice pattern eventually. Definetely better when it features dialogue than when it's being reflective.

 

[Osprey]

Love and Monsters (2020) - 7/10 (Really liked it)

A lovesick young man (Dylan O'Brien) leaves the safety of his bunker and journeys alone across a landscape infested with mutated bugs and other creatures the size of houses in order to re-unite with his girlfriend. Not since maybe The Road has a film had a more literally accurate title. It's about love and monsters, roughly equally. Truth in advertising. I like that. It has a style and humor that reminded me of Zombieland, another film that explored the lighter side of the monster-filled post-apocalypse. Unlike that film, though, it also has a decent amount of depth and feeling, which impressed me. Again, it's about love as much as it is about monsters. It flirts with being a little sappy and the young man looking a little pathetic, but I didn't feel that it was too bad. There's character development and a positive message. It's a bit heartbreaking, but also optimistic. The acting is good, as is the CGI. The last act was a little disappointing as it resorts to a few cliches and felt very Hollywood, especially during the climactic action scene, but it wasn't enough to spoil the movie for me or force me to take a point off. I could've done with more of little Ariana Greenblatt, but that's a compliment, not a criticism, because I found her to be a treat in her limited screen time. Hopefully, there'll be a sequel and we'll get more of her. I was pleasantly surprised by this movie and think that it should appeal to most people who are in the mood for a fun adventure with doses of humor and feeling. It's expensive for a rental ($19.99 on most services), but it could be worth it to you if you miss going to the theater and are willing to splurge to see one of the more entertaining movies that would've ordinarily been in theaters right now.

 

[kihei]

Wild Strawberries (1957) Directed by Ingmar Bergman 4A

Wild Strawberries is generally considered one of Ingmar Bergman's masterworks. The movie has a 94% audience approval rating (95% critical approval rating) on Rotten Tomatoes; an 8.1 rating on IMDb; an 88 on Metacritic). The last number would be significantly higher except the old fuddy-duddy codger at the New York Times Bosley Crowther, who Paulene Kkael lampooned endlessly in her acidic reviews, gave the film a 40 (by Metacritic's standards). It pains me to agree with Crowther, but I think he got this one right. Ostensibly the story is a simple one. About to receive an honorary doctoral degree from a prestigious Swedish university, Borg, an old and retired university professor, looks back on his life. His daughter-in-law hates him, at least she says she does; there is no evidence of it really. His son is unhappy with him because of an old loan, though he seems quite loving to his father. And perfect strangers have many nice things to say about him. Ah, ain't life just like that--some people like you and some people don't. We get a couple of Freudian dream sequences along the way that the audience can play with to their heart's content. In the movie's favour, Sjostrom, director of the great silent film The Phantom Carriage and an early supporter and mentor of Bergman, gives a lovely, very warm performance as Borg and the cinematography is excellent. The big problem for me is that I find this film hopelessly insipid. It raises issues about the old pedant's character that it never addresses. As well, irritatingly, it seems to champion the complacency that Borg feels as a proper response to a live well lived rather than a smug reluctance to dig any deeper into why he is having these troubling dreams. The final shot of him nodding off at the end of the day reminded me of a complacent cat falling asleep on a pillow. Wild Strawberries seems like a film that is ripe for parody. I have now seen the movie twice, once near the beginning of my adult life, and now nearer the end of it. Opinions very often mellow with age (and the prodigious wisdom that comes with it ), but I didn't like Wild Strawberries then and I don't like Wild Strawberries now.

subtitles

Criterion Channel

 

[McOilers97]

Wild at Heart - David Lynch 1990
Nick Cage and David Lynch made quite the team in this one. It's not a super tightly written movie (a lot of Lynch's work isn't), but it provides some pretty unique thrills and definitely has a flair to it that was quite enjoyable. Cage brings the right amount of wild energy to this movie and Laura Dern was good as usual. Lynch has better movies than this, but I think this one has flown way under the radar since it's release 30 years ago.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - Michel Gondry 2004
Can definitely feel Charlie Kaufman's fingerprints all over this script after watching Being John Malkovich and Adaptation earlier this year. Jim Carrey is really good in a non-traditional kind of role for him and the movie tells a compelling story about all facets of a relationship in an original way with Kaufman's out-there writing style.

Lost in Translation - Sofia Coppola 2003
This movie is stunning. Scarlett Johansson was 17 or 18 during filming, and this is the best performance that I've ever seen from her. Bill Murray equally great too. Coppola just seems able to cultivate such honest performances from her actors here as she tells a slow burning little story about loneliness and human connection. Loved it and know I will be coming back to it for re-watches.

 

[nameless1]

Wild Strawberries (1957) Directed by Ingmar Bergman 4A

Wild Strawberries is generally considered one of Ingmar Bergman's masterworks. The movie has a 94% audience approval rating (95% critical approval rating) on Rotten Tomatoes; an 8.1 rating on IMDb; an 88 on Metacritic). The last number would be significantly higher except the old fuddy-duddy codger at the New York Times Bosley Crowther, who Paulene Kkael lampooned endlessly in her acidic reviews, gave the film a 40 (by Metacritic's standards). It pains me to agree with Crowther, but I think he got this one right. Ostensibly the story is a simple one. About to receive an honorary doctoral degree from a prestigious Swedish university, Borg, an old and retired university professor, looks back on his life. His daughter-in-law hates him, at least she says she does; there is no evidence of it really. His son is unhappy with him because of an old loan, though he seems quite loving to his father. And perfect strangers have many nice things to say about him. Ah, ain't life just like that--some people like you and some people don't. We get a couple of Freudian dream sequences along the way that the audience can play with to their heart's content. In the movie's favour, Sjostrom, director of the great silent film The Phantom Carriage and an early supporter and mentor of Bergman, gives a lovely, very warm performance as Borg and the cinematography is excellent. The big problem for me is that I find this film hopelessly insipid. It raises issues about the old pedant's character that it never addresses. As well, irritatingly, it seems to champion the complacency that Borg feels as a proper response to a live well lived rather than a smug reluctance to dig any deeper into why he is having these troubling dreams. The final shot of him nodding off at the end of the day reminded me of a complacent cat falling asleep on a pillow. Wild Strawberries seems like a film that is ripe for parody. I have now seen the movie twice, once near the beginning of my adult life, and now nearer the end of it. Opinions very often mellow with age (and the prodigious wisdom that comes with it ), but I didn't like Wild Strawberries then and I don't like Wild Strawberries now.

subtitles

Criterion Channel

Wild Strawberries is on my top 10 list, but I cannot find fault in your argument. This is easily Bergman's most accessible film, and I think that is why a lot of people hold it in such high regards. I liken it to comfort food. It is easy and sooths the heart, but at the end of the day, all the problems are still there, and nothing is truly solved.

This is the type of film that casts a spell on the audience. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. For those who are enthralled, it is the best thing ever. For those who sees through the tricks, then it is nothing but smokes and mirrors. I am of the former, and even though I see your point of view, I do like the illusion Bergman created.

 

[kihei]

Max Mon Amour (1986) Directed by Nagisa Oshima 3A

There is no sane way to put this, so I will just blurt out the premise of this movie: how would you react if your partner were having a sexual affair with chimpanzee? We'll just let that sink in a moment. Thankfully, the movie doesn't go into sexually graphic detail, only a little cuddling between Margaret (Charlotte Rampling, no less) and a guy in a monkey suit. The notion is more like a cinematic thought experiment: how would you react? Unconvincingly, her husband Peter (Anthony Higgins) reacts by having the monkey move in with them so he can get better used to the idea. Sporting of him, I suppose, but kind of hard to believe anyway. Heaven knows what director Nagisa Oshima intended here with this extremely odd comedy of manners. Oshima is a major director (In the Realm of the Senses; Empire of Passion; Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence), but why he was attracted to this project is anybody's guess. The movie works neither as comedy, nor satire, nor social commentary, nor anything else. Even if one grants that the Max Mon Amour is intentionally absurd and/or surreal, the point remains obscure in the extreme. The movie has the look of late era Luis Bunuel (The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie; That Obscure Object of Desire), so maybe Max Mon Amour is intended as an homage to the great Spanish surrealist. But it remains a curiosity as inexplicable as 1948's Bill and Coo, a feature length film that eschewed human actors in favour of a complete cast of budgies and parrots. Both movies are for the birds.

an odd mix of spoken English and subtitles

MUBI

 

[nameless1]

Max Mon Amour (1986) Directed by Nagisa Oshima 3A

There is no sane way to put this, so I will just blurt out the premise of this movie: how would you react if your partner were having a sexual affair with chimpanzee? We'll just let that sink in a moment. Thankfully, the movie doesn't go into sexually graphic detail, only a little cuddling between Margaret (Charlotte Rampling, no less) and a guy in a monkey suit. The notion is more like a cinematic thought experiment: how would you react? Unconvincingly, her husband Peter (Anthony Higgins) reacts by having the monkey move in with them so he can get better used to the idea. Sporting of him, I suppose, but kind of hard to believe anyway. Heaven knows what director Nagisa Oshima intended here with this extremely odd comedy of manners. Oshima is a major director (In the Realm of the Senses; Empire of Passion; Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence), but why he was attracted to this project is anybody's guess. The movie works neither as comedy, nor satire, nor social commentary, nor anything else. Even if one grants that the Max Mon Amour is intentionally absurd and/or surreal, the point remains obscure in the extreme. The movie has the look of late era Luis Bunuel (The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie; That Obscure Object of Desire), so maybe Max Mon Amour is intended as an homage to the great Spanish surrealist. But it remains a curiosity as inexplicable as 1948's Bill and Coo, a feature length film that eschewed human actors in favour of a complete cast of budgies and parrots. Both movies are for the birds.

an odd mix of spoken English and subtitles

MUBI

Yes, the movie idea itself is absurd, but honestly, I am not surprised Oshima wanted to tackle a story like this. He has always been known as a subversive director, and he explored a lot of taboo topics prior to this one. He often used criminals as protagonists (Cruel Story of Youth, Diary of a Shinjuku Thief, Boy), an uncommon idea at the time in Japan, and at one point, he even explored the idea of rape in school, as some sort of cultist ceremony that harken back to Imperialist Japan. His films are meant to be uncomfortable, and even this one is more off the deep end, it is part of the same pattern.

 

[kihei]

Yes, the movie idea itself is absurd, but honestly, I am not surprised Oshima wanted to tackle a story like this. He has always been known as a subversive director, and he explored a lot of taboo topics prior to this one. He often used criminals as protagonists (Cruel Story of Youth, Diary of a Shinjuku Thief, Boy), an uncommon idea at the time in Japan, and at one point, he even explored the idea of rape in school, as some sort of cultist ceremony that harken back to Imperialist Japan. His films are meant to be uncomfortable, and even this one is more off the deep end, it is part of the same pattern.

He should have monkeyed around more with Max Mon Amour because it doesn't really go anywhere.

 

[nameless1]

He should have monkeyed around more with Max Mon Amour because it doesn't really go anywhere.

Oshima is hit-and-miss with me. Some of his works blow me away and change my perspectives, but then there are others where he is in his head too much and they are just weird for the sake of being weird.

Max Mon Amour is of the later. I kind of want to see it, but given the fact that I know how some of his films make me feel, I never tried hard to seek it out.

By the way, you noted the Buñuel look, and it appears that the producer, writer and even one of the actors are often collaborators of Buñuel. That may be why.

 

[nameless1]

1960s is a time of flux in America. The 1950s brought huge economic growth and stability to the country, but as the people grow up, they begun to see cracks in society. The Vietnam War expediated the sense of doubt and unease, and as people marched and protest, both against the War and injustices against African Americans, the filmmakers also start to challenge the Hollywood status quo. Many of the on-screen protagonists begun to display the same maverick behaviors as their off-screen avatars, anti-heroes became a lot more common, there was ambiguity between good and evil, and open endings were acceptable. Perhaps it was also a response to the various New Wave movements around the world, but movie in the 1960s were a breath of fresh air.

Bullitt is one of the more prominent examples of the Hollywood New Wave, and it even made the National Film Registry as "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". That said, the movie is wildly uneven. For the first hour, it really goes nowhere, and there are a lot of superfluous scenes that adds nothing to the story. The action picks up significantly in the second half, helped greatly by that influential car chase scene, and the incomparable coolness of the one and only Steve McQueen, and even though the movie becomes entertaining overall, I do not think it is actually that good of a movie. Quite frankly, it made it to the list on one big chase scene, and while it is influential for future car chase sequences, as one sees in The French Connection, even that scene has a lot of very noticeable continuity issues.

Near the end there is an airport scene, and if there are no liberties taken, I am still shocked at how laxed airport securities were back then. Many movies back then already showed many of the security risks and loopholes, but high profile highjackings and explosions continued to happen frequently in the 1970s. To be honest, it is actually fun to compare then and now, but one cannot help but marvel at the foresight of some movies, and also the complacency of society at times.

This movie actually made me look carefully at the National Film Registry, and I question its criteria at times. There are a number of arguable choices, like Airplane! for example, and I seriously question the merit of the list. Regardless, while I did enjoy Bullitt, and I cannot say enough about the presence of Steve McQueen, but it is vastly overrated. It is a 6/10. I would recommend it, but I would not hold high expectations for it.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore (1974) - 7.5/10

Ah yes Scorsese's classic follow-up to Mean Streets. Also featuring one of the most annoying child actor performances captured in a Hollywood film that features an Oscar win in a category.

 

[hoyster]

Lost in Translation - Sofia Coppola 2003
This movie is stunning. Scarlett Johansson was 17 or 18 during filming, and this is the best performance that I've ever seen from her. Bill Murray equally great too. Coppola just seems able to cultivate such honest performances from her actors here as she tells a slow burning little story about loneliness and human connection. Loved it and know I will be coming back to it for re-watches.

Exactly how I feel about the movie. Might be my favorite movie of all-time. This is where I fell in love with ScarJo, such a great performance. I feel like this is a movie you can watch no matter how you're feeling and get something different out of it every time. It can be funny, it can be sad, it can be just fun adventure in Tokyo, it can be just beautiful scenery of Japan and it's culture that makes you want to travel there. 10/10 for me on every watch.

 

[Osprey]

Basket Case (1982)
Acting: 1/10
Plot: 1/10
Effects: 1/10
Gonzo-ness: 10/10

 

[kihei]

The Endless Trench (2020) Directed by Jon Garano, Aitor Arregi and Jose Mari Goenaga 7B

The Endless Trench should be called The Endless Cubbyhole, but that doesn’t have a very dramatic ring to it. The movie is about Higino who goes into hiding in a tiny space behind a cupboard in his own house near the end of the Spanish Civil War and doesn’t emerge for over 30 years, not until the late ‘60s when nobody cares anymore if he fought in the Resistance or not. At two and a half hours, The Endless Trench is a purposely long movie in which we really feel the slow passage of time. Higino is anything but a heroic figure. There are rumours that he, himself, engaged in atrocities during the war and he fearfully forces his long-suffering wife to stay with him nearly every second of the day. Even when he knows he is probably safe, he continues to cower in his tiny living space. What starts out as a war movie ends up providing a whole cornucopia of various themes, themes about isolation, fear, long-term relationships, and even gender dynamics. The Endless Trench is an uncompromising character study of a weak man in a harrowing situation.

subtitles

Netflix

 

[kihei]

Swallow (2020) Directed by Carlo Mirabella-Davis 7B

Swallow is about Hunter (Haley Bennett in one of the best performances of the year) a young, pretty wife who totally lacks confidence, newly married into a super rich family. She should be happy but isn’t, though at the start of the movie she doesn’t realize it quite yet. She develops a rare affliction—she begins to eat inanimate objects, like marbles, thumb tacks and batteries which she discretely collects as trophies, “discretely” being the operative word here. When she gets pregnant, her condition worsens. Her rich husband is superficially caring but not really, his mother snooty but trying to be helpful, and his father just wants results, one of those types. Swallow is an odd combination of things, a feminist body-horror movie by a male director, and a damn good one at that. For me the movie was like watching Roman Polanski’s Repulsion, about a young woman falling deeper into psychosis by the moment, and Dogtooth, a movie about a family who has kept their teenage children free from any awareness of other people for their entire lives. Like that film, I just wanted to keep watching Swallow to see what happens next. The movie isn’t preachy in the least, but it makes a lot of subtle points about female agency, power dynamics and lack of control over one’s life and touches indirectly on a host of hot-button topics, including abortion. Bennett is superb as she plays Hunter as this fragile, insecure thing who looks like she is going to crumble into a heap, but who finds resources in the strangest place imaginable. Swallow is one of the genuine sleepers of the past couple years.


Best Movies of 2020 so far

1) First Cow, Reichardt, US
2) Dick Johnson Is Dead, Johnson, US
3) Never Rarely Sometimes Always, Hittman, US
4) Corpus Christi, Komasa, Poland
5) Swallow, Mirabella-Davis, US
6) The Wild Goose Lake, Diao, China
7) Beanpole, Balagov, Russia
8) Da 5 Bloods, Lee, US
9) Shaun, the Sheep: Farmageddon, Phelan and Becher, UK
10) Relic, James, Australia

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Love and Monsters (2020) - 7/10 (Really liked it)

A lovesick young man (Dylan O'Brien) leaves the safety of his bunker and journeys alone across a landscape infested with mutated bugs and other creatures the size of houses in order to re-unite with his girlfriend. Not since maybe The Road has a film had a more literally accurate title. It's about love and monsters, roughly equally. Truth in advertising. I like that. It has a style and humor that reminded me of Zombieland, another film that explored the lighter side of the monster-filled post-apocalypse. Unlike that film, though, it also has a decent amount of depth and feeling, which impressed me. Again, it's about love as much as it is about monsters. It flirts with being a little sappy and the young man looking a little pathetic, but I didn't feel that it was too bad. There's character development and a positive message. It's a bit heartbreaking, but also optimistic. The acting is good, as is the CGI. The last act was a little disappointing as it resorts to a few cliches and felt very Hollywood, especially during the climactic action scene, but it wasn't enough to spoil the movie for me or force me to take a point off. I could've done with more of little Ariana Greenblatt, but that's a compliment, not a criticism, because I found her to be a treat in her limited screen time. Hopefully, there'll be a sequel and we'll get more of her. I was pleasantly surprised by this movie and think that it should appeal to most people who are in the mood for a fun adventure with doses of humor and feeling. It's expensive for a rental ($19.99 on most services), but it could be worth it to you if you miss going to the theater and are willing to splurge to see one of the more entertaining movies that would've ordinarily been in theaters right now.

You should watch Monsters (2010), which is up the same alley as Love and Monsters.

If you dig films that make subtle references to generate atmosphere, you will really enjoy this movie.

 

[Pink Mist]

Thor: The Dark World (2013) directed by Alan Taylor

In the wake of the events following The Avengers, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) must work to reunite the Nine Realms while facing the threat of eternal darkness unleashed by the Dark Elves. Meanwhile, Thor attempts to rekindle his relationship with the human scientist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman, clearly phoning it in). Clearly there is a lot going on in this film, and its plot is as a result very messy, but also very forgettable. I had to google the plot of it this morning despite only watching the film yesterday just to write a brief summary. The villain (Christopher Eccleston, unrecognizable under pounds of make-up and CGI) especially is very weak and forgettable, however the fight against the villain which involves fighting through different portals and worlds is really well done. All in all it’s a more of the same if you’re into superhero movies but definitely one of the more forgettable ones.

4/10

 

[kihei]

His House (2020) Directed by Remi Weekes 7A

A refugee couple escape from war-torn Sudan where their lives are in serious danger. During the boat ride across the ocean, a tragedy occurs. Once, they get to London, though, they catch a break and are granted refugee status and given a home in which to live in an estate condo. Unfortunately for them, the house is haunted. If you think Jordan Peele comes up with audaciously original horror movies, well, folks, meet Remi Weekes. Actually, it is quite surprising, not to mention the great strength of the movie, that the refugee story and the horror story fit together so well. However, it is the way they fit together that is so memorable. Like Peele's horror movies, the more one thinks about His House, the more multi-dimensional it becomes. But that's for later. While His House is an insightful look at the refugee experience, it is also a very good haunted house movie. Sometimes the house isn’t the problem; sometimes it’s the ghosts that we carry with us from place to place.

Netflix


Best of 2020 so far

1) First Cow, Reichardt, US
2) Dick Johnson Is Dead, Johnson, US
3) Never Rarely Sometimes Always, Hittman, US
4) Corpus Christi, Komasa, Poland
5) Swallow, Mirabella-Davis, US
6) His House, Weekes, UK
7) The Wild Goose Lake, Diao, China
8) Da 5 Bloods, Lee, US
9) Shaun the Sheep: Farmageddon, Phelan and Becher, UK
10) Relic, James, Australia

 

[Pink Mist]

The Lighthouse (2019) directed by Robert Eggers

Two lighthouse keepers (Robert Pattinson and Willem Dafoe) stationed at a remote lighthouse slowly go insane as they are stranded there by a storm. Filmed in black and white and in a square aspect ratio so it aesthetically looks like film or photography for the time period when the film is to take place. It is confidently and exceptionally directed by Eggers and carried by great performances by Pattinson and Dafoe. The film still holds up since when I watched it in theatres last year.

Mostly though, it's a film about getting drunk and horny with the boys

8/10