Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Spring 2021 Edition

[kihei]

Barbara (2017) Directed by Mathieu Almaric 7B

Barbara is a biopic of a chanteuse who helped initiate Nouveau Chanson in France, but of whom no one in NA, outside of Quebec anyway, is likely to have ever heard. Director Mathieu Almaric’s approach to a biopic is so utterly different that the fact that I didn’t know anything about Barbara (Jeanne Balibar, great performance) didn’t limit my interest in the movie. Barbara could not be more in contrast to Hollywood biopics that recount the lives of popular singers like Ray Charles, Johnny Cash and Hank Williams in straightforward fashion. For one thing Barbara is a movie within a movie. As the first scene ends, Yves (Mathieu Almaric), the director, yells cut, and suddenly we are aware that we are watching the making of a movie about Barbara. The movie quickly acquires new implications like a hydra sprouting tentacles. While remaining a biopic of sorts, Barbara starts exploring fresh territory—how the responsibility of telling Barbara’s story places great stress on both the actor and director who find the project surprisingly personal, even intimidating. The notions of celebrity and a biographer’s necessary psychological involvement are viewed through a more complex lens than we are accustomed to in Hollywood biopics which would never consider these kinds of ideas in a million years. Which raises an interesting question: how should a biopic balance the life of its subject with the effects that he or she has on others, the reason for that person’s fame in the first place?

subtitles

MUBI

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Barbara (2017) Directed by Mathieu Almaric 7B

Barbara is a biopick of a chanteuse who helped initiate Nouveau Chanson in France, but of whom no one in NA, outside of Quebec anyway, is likely to have ever heard. Director Mathieu Almaric’s approach to a biopic is so utterly different that the fact that I didn’t know anything about Barbara (Jeanne Balibar, great performance) didn’t limit my interest in the movie. Barbara could not be more in contrast to Hollywood biopics that recount the lives of popular singers like Ray Charles, Johnny Cash and Hank Williams in straightforward fashion. For one thing Barbara is a movie within a movie. As the first scene ends, Yves (Mathieu Almaric), the director, yells cut, and suddenly we are aware that we are watching the making of a movie about Barbara. The movie quickly acquires new implications like a hydra sprouting tentacles. While remaining a biopic of sorts, Barbara starts exploring fresh territory—how the responsibility of telling Barbara’s story places great stress on both the actor and director who find the project surprisingly personal, even intimidating. The notions of celebrity and a biographer’s necessary psychological involvement are viewed through a more complex lens than we are accustomed to in Hollywood biopics which would never consider these kinds of ideas in a million years. Which raises an interesting question: how should a biopic balance the life of its subject with the effects that he or she has on others, the reason for that person’s fame in the first place?

subtitles

MUBI

I don't know why I haven't seen this one since I love both Almaric and Balibar... Your comment made me think of H Story, have you seen it? (it's a 10/10 film to me)

 

[kihei]

I don't know why I haven't seen this one since I love both Almaric and Balibar... Your comment made me think of H Story, have you seen it? (it's a 10/10 film to me)

Nope.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Capricorn One (1977) - 7.5/10

-Shockingly no Hollywood film since the 70s has been made with the word Capricorn in the title, not sure why
-Shockingly no Hollywood film with the premise of a NASA faking something like this has been made since (excluding a smaller scale non-Hollywood indie), not sure why.
-Tbh I'd rather just follow around Elliot Gould aroudn during his investigation throughout but it's shoehorned in
-Speaking of shoehorned, this has so much going on that it needed to be 3 hours long imo. It does get a bit too silly in terms of plot after 20ish minutes but takes itself very seriously playing up the paranoia 70s conspiracy angle.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Capricorn One (1977) - 7.5/10

-Shockingly no Hollywood film since the 70s has been made with the word Capricorn in the title, not sure why
-Shockingly no Hollywood film with the premise of a NASA faking something like this has been made since (excluding a smaller scale non-Hollywood indie), not sure why.
-Tbh I'd rather just follow around Elliot Gould aroudn during his investigation throughout but it's shoehorned in
-Speaking of shoehorned, this has so much going on that it needed to be 3 hours long imo. It does get a bit too silly in terms of plot after 20ish minutes but takes itself very seriously playing up the paranoia 70s conspiracy angle.

This one's actually out there on youtube. I've tried to get through it a few times but I just can't. Among many other problems, the casting of OJ Simpson didn't age well at all.

 

[Osprey]

I watched a couple of Cronenberg films the last few nights.

Videodrome (1983) - 4/10 (Disliked it)

A pirate TV station producer (James Woods) discovers and becomes obsessed with a mysterious broadcast signal showing violence and torture. It's sleazy and trippy, but slightly intelligent. It's a commentary on the popular 80s concept that television was corrupting people's minds, except that Cronenberg takes it literally and also borrows from a popular 70s conspiracy film. That was interesting and it has some impressive special and practical effects (such as an 80s version of a VR headset and various forms of body horror). I couldn't really get into the story, though, or like Woods' character (is James Woods ever likable?). It was too weird and serious for me, like Scanners (Cronenberg's earlier film). Whenever I watch a film with hallucinations like this sober, I wonder if I'm doing it right.

Dead Ringers (1988) - 6/10 (Liked it)

Identical twin gynecologists (Jeremy Irons) share everything, including women [Edit: What a terrible, lazy summary]. This seems like Cronenberg's first step to branching out, since it really isn't a horror, though it is a bit unsettling. It's more of a character study about identical twins and how they can be both similar and different at the same time. Irons is really fantastic in this and carries the film. He uses posture, body language and facial expression to reflect when he's playing the more confident "alpha" twin and when he's playing the more sensitive "beta" twin. I was pretty interested in the dynamic between the two and the woman (Genevieve Bujold) caught in the middle. Unfortunately, I felt that it got a little tedious in the final half hour (it should've been 20 minutes shorter, I think) and the ending was a bit of a let down. I think that it could've been a little more exciting and added a different perspective to a re-watch. As is, I don't see much reason to watch the film again, but I did enjoy it, mostly because of Irons' dual performances.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

This one's actually out there on youtube. I've tried to get through it a few times but I just can't. Among many other problems, the casting of OJ Simpson didn't age well at all.

He didn't have a lot of lines and I can't really say it made any difference to me, I didn't know who the actor was until after the film finished. In fact the only thing I can really criticize with the actors is the silly crop duster pilot at the end who doesn't fit the rest of the film. It's a perfectly good thriller though, a lot better than some of the other 70s paranoia thrillers like Klute so I'm pretty sure this has been unfairly rated over time due to OJ Simpson. Wonder if a similar thing will happen with Kevin Spacey films.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Save Yourself (Andrew, 2015) - With its German scientist experimenting on unwilling women, it encroaches on Centipede territory, but in softer and weaker tones that make the results kind of bland and boring. It's nowhere near the aesthetics of The Human Centipedes (First Sequence), but it was presented at the iPhone Film Festival, and if it means it was shot using iPhones (I don't know), that's still very impressive. 2.5/10

 

[kihei]

The Workshop (2017) Directed by Laurent Cantet 6A

Damned odd thing to do. Director Laurent Cantet hasn't remade his earlier and best known film The Class, he just has recycled the exact same plot device. A writer/teacher is stuck in a classroom trying to instruct a diverse collection of indifferently motivated adolescents to, in this instance, write a collaborative mystery novel. The mystery novel assignment and the more picturesque Mediterranean locale are all that differentiate the two movies in terms of their set--up. In The Workshop, the focus is more specifically on one student, Antoine (Matthieu Lucci) and his relationship with his mentor Olivia (Marina Fols). Antoine is smarter than he lets on, but abrasive and challenging, all too ready to play the provocateur. Olivia is alternately frustrated by and fascinated with him because as he tells her, "I scare you." Indeed, just what Antoine is going to do next is at the heart of the suspense in the movie. The Workshop is a nice deconstruction of some common suspense movie tropes, but it is not exactly a thriller, more of a character study. The Workshop is nicely accomplished, but, as most of the students would probably agree, something of an academic exercise.

subtitles

MUBI

 

[Tkachuk4MVP]

Nobody (2021)
7/10 (I enjoyed it)
If you like action movies like The Equalizer and John Wick you’ll like this movie. It’s nothing too special to be honest but it kept me entertained throughout and is what I expected from watching the trailer. Just a solid action movie

Big fan of this one. Delivered exactly what was promised, and Odenkirk makes for a surprisingly credible action hero.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

This one's actually out there on youtube. I've tried to get through it a few times but I just can't. Among many other problems, the casting of OJ Simpson didn't age well at all.

I actually had no idea that it was OJ until after the film and he had fairly few speaking lines so it made no difference to my enjoyment. I do wonder though if this film was unfairly rated online because of OJ, it's better than a lot of higher rated 70s thrillers like Klute. Wonder if this same thing happens with certain Kevin Spacey films now.

I'm fairly left wing but I'm also a philistine so I have no problems enjoying something regardless of who made it or was in it because life on earth is short and there's only so much good media you can consume that it feels like an unnecessary filter to me.

 

[Osprey]

I actually had no idea that it was OJ until after the film and he had fairly few speaking lines so it made no difference to my enjoyment. I do wonder though if this film was unfairly rated online because of OJ, it's better than a lot of higher rated 70s thrillers like Klute. Wonder if this same thing happens with certain Kevin Spacey films now.

OJ featured in all three Naked Gun movies, playing a cop, no less, and those are well rated and liked. I doubt that people are underrating a lesser known film from over a decade earlier just because he was in it. Now, if you want a 70s movie of his that maybe didn't age well, try a TV movie called A Killing Affair.

 

[kihei]

Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary (2002) Directed by Guy Maddin 7B

Some adventurous soul at the CBC commissioned experimental director Guy Madden to document a performance of the Royal Winnipeg Ballet’s adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. They probably weren’t expecting what they got and I hope nobody got fired, because the end result is very pleasing to the eye. Maddin takes a typically idiosyncratic approach to the performance. He photographs the dancers in dreamy black and white, making liberal use of various colour filters along the way. Not infrequently he cuts away from the dance for close ups and mid-range shots that put a lot of emotion into play. As is the case with many of his films, the result ends up looking like a vintage silent film from the late ‘20s. His camera does as much swirling as the dancers who are terrific by the way. Maddin often focuses more on the female characters than on Dracula, giving the movie a seductive edge that may not have been as evident on the stage. Lucy (Tara Birtwhistle) makes a sensuous, alluring, willing victim, her sexuality requiring little encouragement from the Count. Likewise, her friend Mina (CindyMarie Small) seems more eager than frightened by the release from propriety that the vampire will provide. Dracula: Pages from a Virgin’s Diary is like no other dance film that I have seen. Yet though his approach is thoroughly original, Maddin seems the perfect choice of director here. It is just fun to watch this beautifully atmospheric ballet float by. Helps if you like ballet, of course, but this is certainly a fresh way of capturing its inherent magic.

some intertitles

Criterion Channel

 

[Puck]

I really did not know what to make of Nobody. I agree with Tkatchuk that Odenkirk surprises as an action hero (In a good way). But the writer for Nobody is the same as John Wick and unfortunately I found that he (Derek Kolstad) went back to the same storyline recipe. In a written interview Kolstad claimed he improved on the logic inside a similar storyline but I'm not convinced; I got the impression he was trying to sell his new product here. The fight choreography is not as good/tight as in Wick. Although the dead Russian body count is high like in Wick's. I don't want to be too negative though, Odenkirk does surprisingly well inside a story that went back to a successful well that wasn't really an improvement. Nobody is OK I guess as long as you don't compare the two universes. Kolstad adds in the interview that he'd like the two protagonists to meet in a sequel (Keanu and Odenkirk), personally I hope not. (It might be Hollywood fun that Kong and Zilla met but like I don't ever need to see Bond meet Bourne, or DC meet Marvel characters, it's redundant). And you just know Kolstad wants more Nobody sequels, given the ending scenes that cry for it. I really like the Wick series, and now they have a clone (albeit inferior IMO). Whatever.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Excalibur. This is, perhaps, the best serious King Arthur movie (at least among the ones I've seen) and yet, I still wouldn't call it good. It is ponderous and poorly acted. I don't want to fully blame Monty Python for taking the piss out of Artie, but you can't help but think of their interpretation of the material every time you see blood spurt or an appendage get hacked off. But this thing does have one thing going for it in that it looks great. It's got this weird and trippy and dreamy sheen that feels like it could only come in the late 70s/early 80s. There's this eerie green glow throughout. Ample fog and mist. Cool sets. I just didn't like anyone on the sets.

 

[Pink Mist]

Intolerance (1916) directed by D. W. Griffith

The yin to the yang of D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation. Made in response to the reception of his controversial and vehemently racist film, Intolerance tells four tales of loves fight against hate and prejudice. The film cross-cuts between a contemporary tale of a worker’s strike and late life in the slums of a city, the fall of Babylon, St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, and the crucifixion of Christ. The story is clearly epic in scale, with grand ambitions and even larger breathtaking sets (in particular his recreation of Babylon) with thousands of extras. The level of detail in the film is amazing. The film does take some time to get running (and in case you aren’t aware of its theme, the word “intolerance” appears in basically every intertitle), and is difficult to follow at times as it jumps between different time periods. Some of the stories also do not get enough time to tell their story and seem like afterthoughts, in spite of the film’s massive running time. But when it all comes to a crescendo about two hours in s an extremely gripping and effective film. Made as an atonement of sorts for his previous film (though Griffith would never explicitly apologize for creating Birth of a Nation), Griffith overcompensates with an overwrought presentation in the opposite direction, but it is hard not to applaud its ambition and scale.

Full film here:

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (Dougherty, 2019) - I enjoy dumb and silly films, but this thing is just really boring. 2/10

 

[Osprey]

Made as an atonement of sorts for his previous film (though Griffith would never explicitly apologize for creating Birth of a Nation), Griffith overcompensates with an overwrought presentation in the opposite direction, but it is hard not to applaud its ambition and scale.

I initially believed that it was an atonement, as well, but it now seems that it was a rebuttal to his critics. Griffith was indignant towards efforts to ban The Birth of a Nation and even added an intertitle to its second run to make a case against censorship. Intolerance was seemingly him lecturing his critics (hence the "overcompensating"), not offering a mea culpa. It's still an extraordinary film, but probably made with no better intentions than his previous film, unfortunately.

 

[Pink Mist]

I initially believed that it was an atonement, as well, but it now seems that it was a rebuttal to his critics. Griffith was indignant towards efforts to ban The Birth of a Nation and even added an intertitle to its second run to make a case against censorship. Intolerance was seemingly him lecturing his critics (hence the "overcompensating"), not offering a mea culpa. It's still an extraordinary film, but probably made with no better intentions than his previous film, unfortunately.

Interesting, I can definitely read it as a rebuttal rather than an atonement.

 

[kihei]

A Serbian Film (2010) Directed by Srdjan Spasojevic 4D

After I recently saw Quo Vadis, Aida, a movie in which a Serbian war atrocity plays a pivotal role, it kind of snuck up on me that maybe I should finally watch A Serbian Film. As I never planned to see the film, I had read about it, not in great detail, but enough to know the lay of the land. I knew that it was highly controversial, had scenes that caused anger and revulsion, and that it was partly intended as a response by its young Serbian director to his country's behaviour during the Bosnian conflict. After seeing Quo Vadis, Aida, I was curious about the fact that a Serb chose to make such a movie--which seems to me a remarkably uncommon response of a national to the acts of his own country.

Yes, there are certainly some scenes I could have lived without. However, I was surprised how much this movie--about a semi-retired porn star who, taking a last assignment he can hardly refuse, gets in way over his head and then some--resembled a movie with serious intent. I didn't think it was well directed exactly, but it was more a case of wishing the guy had another year of film school, not that he was incompetent or exploitative without purpose. This is certainly not a movie intended to titillate or arouse, that's for sure. It is a movie intended to shock, and I suppose it is some kind of personal statement meant to reflect its creator's immense disgust at and possibly hatred of his own society. Though that might be too generous--the anger is very real, palpable, unhinged even, but the exact message is incoherent. The movie is an expression of raw-feeling that remains undigested--what exactly director Srdjam Spasojevic is trying to say specifically remains beyond his artistic and intellectual grasp. Though A Serbian Film is not a movie I will ever watch again, nor recommend, seeing it was not a waste of my time.

subtitles

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Marriage Story (2019) directed by Noah Baumbach

Put this one off for like a year since I thought it would be a chore to get through – 2+ hours about people fighting and going through a divorce! But finally sat down to watch it last night, and it definitely earned its platitudes, particularly the writing and performances from Driver and Johansson. In many ways it is a horror movie about relationships gone sour over the small fault lines present in every relationship. Also reminded me a lot about A Separation, a film I recently rewatched about child custody battles wherein one partner wants to relocated to America while the other wants to stay behind. In many ways this is the American remake of that film. Makes me glad that I have never been married or had children so that I’ve only ever had to deal with grieving an ended relationship rather than legal warfare, custody battles, and financial ruin. Anyone who watches this with their significant other is brave as I think it’s a way to bring the fault lines in your relationship to the surface.

Didn't get the appeal, personally, and I'm not one of those folks who holds his nose up at slice of life artworks. Maybe Scarlet Johansson's breakdown to the lawyer was a pretty good scene but I found Driver impotent, lame and an embarassing stand-in (made worse by his fit at the end) but I generally find Baumbach to be a big fat zero. While We're Young is the one movie from an acclaimed filmmaker that's always stuck in my head for how stupid and silly it was. He reeks of unoriginal Woody Allen wannabe to me.

 

[Pink Mist]

The Seventh Seal [Det sjunde inseglet] (1957) directed by Ingmar Bergman

Returning disillusioned from the Crusades to a Swedish countryside death ridden from the plague, a knight (Max von Sydow) challenges Death (Bengt Ekerot), who has come to take his life, to a game of chess to prolong living. This classic film left me feeling cold that first time I watched it a couple of years ago, however returning to it now it finally clicked and I’ve warmed to it and it was a really enjoyable watch. Calling it an enjoyable watch may seem odd given its plot summary, but what the summary hides is the amount of humour (mostly gallows humour) Bergman injects into what otherwise could have been a very solemn film about death (or Death if you prefer). I had forgotten how funny and witty this film is, not claiming its a comedy because its not, but the humour in the film is underappreciated and brings a lightness to its subject manner. Anyway, my second viewing of this film blew me away and I think a lot of why it worked for me this time is the humour in Bergman’s script (not to mention his iconic direction, excellent use of lighting and shadows, von Sydow and Ekerot’s fantastic performances along with the rest of the cast of Bergman regulars, and so on).

Also a good movie to watch during the pandemic, I haven't seen it brought up often when people talk about pandemic movies.

 

[kihei]

Valley of Souls (2019) Directed by Nicolas Rincon Gille 8B

You have just unpacked your bags at your luxury resort about an hour's flight from Cartagena, you and yours are strolling along the beach headed for a patio restaurant overlooking the ocean where they serve fresh lobster out of giant steel pots of boiling water. On your way, you glance toward the sea and see an old fisherman mending his nets. You forget about him completely in less than four seconds. This is a movie about that guy.

A peasant in a skiff arrives home to find that while his daughter is safe, his two sons have been abducted by the Columbian paramilitary who are pitiless thugs who enjoy causing terror. The old man goes along the river to look for them--not to find them alive, but to recover their bodies. This is a quest movie, but not a quest for a magic ring or the Holy Grail or Excalibur. Rather it is a quest to bring his two sons home and bury them with dignity. He finds one body submerged amidst tree debris, but his search for the other one continues. Along the way, he meets people who hinder and people who help him. He meets his share of dragons, too. Valley of Souls is a long, slow look at his ordeal, first along the river than on land. The fisherman is a simple man, his skin weathered, his body fit because of the lifelong toil that he has endured. He is the sort of character that Hemingway might have written about. There are long stretches where not much happens in this movie, but when he does interact with others, the movie is riveting. There is one, long very original scene that is among the great suspense sequences in movies. As well, the cinematography couldn't be better. If you hate what your country has become, this is the way to go about making a movie about it.

subtitles

MUBI

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Gouttes d'eau sur pierres brûlantes (Water Drops On Burning Rocks, Ozon, 2000) - Certainly one of my favorite films by Ozon, this Fassbinder adaptation is both restrained and off-the-wall. Restrained, mostly, in its Fassbinder undertones - Ozon avoids to replicate the aesthetics of the German director, but you still recognize his touch in the fine details, a costume element, or a character's posture or delivery. It's eccentricity feels also very controled. It's a crazy film, but everything seems fine-tuned and strictly regulated - its theatricality brings a strong distanciation, but it also makes things very rigid (in structure and delivery), an effect that is used in similar ways by Lynch in his Rabbits. What's brilliant about Ozon's proposition is that he takes the original play with a pinch of irony: very mature/adult subject matters, presented from a kid's point of view (Fassbinder was 19 when he wrote it). The characters are insufferable because they are children in adult's bodies - and the scheme is only given away in the board game scene. A fun - and often beautiful - film to go back too. 8.5/10

 

[kihei]

What Fassbinder work are you discussing (or is your reader just supposed to look that up)? (Your too brief dalliance with IMDb summaries was a very good idea). On the face of it Ozon/Fassbinder sounds like a very odd couple.