But those gaps are smaller than in same-ish movies I've seen before. Stream-of-consciousness just having finished the film: Ex Machina has beautiful cinematography and/or high-end cameras, but that doesn't make a film. I want a story that's true and well-told, and characters that are real reflections of humanity (and other beings). This movie has the latter, with people (especially the main character) that I definitely saw in people of real life, including myself. And if I were my so much more self-absorbed self of 10-15 years ago, I would've identified with Caleb (main character) even more. And the utterly nouveaux-modern-next-generation-techy feel of it all (think Shattered Glass + Goodwill Hunting characters and youthful pride, with whatever newest tech and beautiful and maybe stark-cold CGI as a visual basis) is alright, cool, but where's the integrity? My main issues are with Ava--the A.I.--and Caleb--the good boy thrown into the situation. What are the moviemaker(s) trying to say here? Sexuality can just be programmed into software? And also attraction can? And friendship? And that an incredibly smart A.I. would trust the first man she meets that isn't her creator? And all within a week? Even putting all that aside, I see a suturing of elements in the characters. I can't explain it, it would seem. I am just not being given the words. But scene to scene as I watched, I saw people embodying things that seemed contrary to who they were introduced to be. Well, maybe I'm wrong and that was the whole point of the movie. Because I admit that possibility, and because of the style, it gets a 7 instead of 5 or 6. Not that those numbers really matter. I'd recommend it for all but the most thinky evenings.
Reviews
8 Reviews
Legend of the Blue Hole
(2004)
An uncharacteristically moody/atmospheric short with a bonus.
6 April 2016
James Rolfe, aka the Angry Video game Nerd, aka Board James, aka comrade to all true-hearted Millennial homespun artists of all kinds, really nailed it here, in my humble opinion. As opposed to the hilariously bad, ragey, yet somehow endearing AVGN shorts, and James's other campy horror stuff, this is something I'd truly call an atmospheric, non-ironic film.
It's something I'm sure we'd all like to see more of from James Rolfe.
That said, the film is a not-too-dark horror short with a bunch of heart. I say heart not because of the content itself, but because it feels so very much like the stuff of Twilight Zonia that James so obviously loves. Interesting, realistic characters, otherworldly subjects, dark settings, the forest, the wild of the universe, the unknown--all these wrap up into a nice vignette of scare. But the surprise might be the zeitgeist that James just nailed here. Legend of the Blue Hole is a youthful slice of the times--baggy jeans, white t-shirts, urban myths, camp fires, wry dry boy-girl chitchat, long hair, Green Day (well maybe not Green Day, but it fits)...and much more importantly...hmm...so much that I can't quite describe. And it's all seamless, not because it was engineered, but because it grew that way.
Really good job James. 9/10.
It's something I'm sure we'd all like to see more of from James Rolfe.
That said, the film is a not-too-dark horror short with a bunch of heart. I say heart not because of the content itself, but because it feels so very much like the stuff of Twilight Zonia that James so obviously loves. Interesting, realistic characters, otherworldly subjects, dark settings, the forest, the wild of the universe, the unknown--all these wrap up into a nice vignette of scare. But the surprise might be the zeitgeist that James just nailed here. Legend of the Blue Hole is a youthful slice of the times--baggy jeans, white t-shirts, urban myths, camp fires, wry dry boy-girl chitchat, long hair, Green Day (well maybe not Green Day, but it fits)...and much more importantly...hmm...so much that I can't quite describe. And it's all seamless, not because it was engineered, but because it grew that way.
Really good job James. 9/10.
Scenes from the Suburbs
(2011)
a tug on the heart and questions for the head
13 April 2012
Before I watched this, I watched the complementary music video to "The Suburbs" (the first track on the album of the same name). I recommend watching both.
As someone who is questioning society's ideas of what it means to grow up, this story is a touching one. At first glance, to the uninitiated, it could come off like just another teen drama love triangle. That would be a tragic misinterpretation of this fine, authentic piece of art, and it would fall short of Arcade Fire's sensibilities and desire to deal with what's really going on with "America" beneath all the "issues." (At least, that's my interpretation of most of their work so far.) For, as opposed to some Disney story that pits friends against each other for a girlfriend/boyfriend, this isn't about that kind of relationship. In fact, it has nothing to do with the female character--it's about a friendship between two guys. A friendship torn apart by change (not good change) and fear as one of them pulls away from the group as accepts the deeper disease behind what the authorities in his life are telling him, and portraying.
The unique symbolism of how our "communities" have become is a minimally-important background for a youthfully-, authentically-acted short drama between childhood best friends.
I don't want to give the plot away, so I'll just end this by saying I now understand the album lyrics "With my old friends I can remember when / You cut your hair, I never saw you again." The questions it leaves us with are deeply important in this nation of detached souls.
Should we look a certain way to grow up? Should we surrender to the world's system to grow up? *Should* we grow up?
As someone who is questioning society's ideas of what it means to grow up, this story is a touching one. At first glance, to the uninitiated, it could come off like just another teen drama love triangle. That would be a tragic misinterpretation of this fine, authentic piece of art, and it would fall short of Arcade Fire's sensibilities and desire to deal with what's really going on with "America" beneath all the "issues." (At least, that's my interpretation of most of their work so far.) For, as opposed to some Disney story that pits friends against each other for a girlfriend/boyfriend, this isn't about that kind of relationship. In fact, it has nothing to do with the female character--it's about a friendship between two guys. A friendship torn apart by change (not good change) and fear as one of them pulls away from the group as accepts the deeper disease behind what the authorities in his life are telling him, and portraying.
The unique symbolism of how our "communities" have become is a minimally-important background for a youthfully-, authentically-acted short drama between childhood best friends.
I don't want to give the plot away, so I'll just end this by saying I now understand the album lyrics "With my old friends I can remember when / You cut your hair, I never saw you again." The questions it leaves us with are deeply important in this nation of detached souls.
Should we look a certain way to grow up? Should we surrender to the world's system to grow up? *Should* we grow up?
Shakespeare in Love
(1998)
call me a romantic...
31 August 2007
This movie asks this question: what if William Shakespeare had lived the life of Romeo during the writing of Romeo and Juliet? As Shakespeare falls for a girl high above his rank, pursues her in shadows and behind stage walls, and comes to blows with her noble suitor and the whole of England, the action of Shakespeare in Love and scenes of Romeo and Juliet weave in and out of each other with style and grace.
Stories such as these can usually be called contrived, and indeed might be called such here, but somehow, I just don't care. Maybe it's the artist in me, or maybe (and more probably) it's the acting, directing, and screen writing, but I couldn't help but be charmed, pulled in, and thoroughly affected by this wonderful film. At every turn the acting and writing managed to provide beautiful romance while sidestepping the dangers of being stilted and contrived as the two stories are made to coincide. The result is a natural, livable story that disarmed me and kept me with it dramatically. Paltrow's radiance and range pulled me in and I fell in love with her just as Shakespeare was. Fiennes's performance was just unassuming enough--then explosive!-- to make me let my guard down, empathize, fear, and hope with his character. The glorious ensemble cast, including the indomitable Judi Dench and the realistic and human Geoffrey Rush put the last nail in the coffin of any doubts. This movie was impeccably executed, and that freed me to enjoy it! Well done, crew. It's a writer's dream realized.
Stories such as these can usually be called contrived, and indeed might be called such here, but somehow, I just don't care. Maybe it's the artist in me, or maybe (and more probably) it's the acting, directing, and screen writing, but I couldn't help but be charmed, pulled in, and thoroughly affected by this wonderful film. At every turn the acting and writing managed to provide beautiful romance while sidestepping the dangers of being stilted and contrived as the two stories are made to coincide. The result is a natural, livable story that disarmed me and kept me with it dramatically. Paltrow's radiance and range pulled me in and I fell in love with her just as Shakespeare was. Fiennes's performance was just unassuming enough--then explosive!-- to make me let my guard down, empathize, fear, and hope with his character. The glorious ensemble cast, including the indomitable Judi Dench and the realistic and human Geoffrey Rush put the last nail in the coffin of any doubts. This movie was impeccably executed, and that freed me to enjoy it! Well done, crew. It's a writer's dream realized.
Crash
(I) (2004)
Great Idea, Bad Execution
4 March 2007
I can't believe Roger Ebert and the Academy rate this movie so highly--and IMDb users, for that matter. This movie about people succumbing to or overcoming racism strikes a chord a couple times, but only if the viewer is willing to suspend judgment for very long periods of contrived plot machinations that get you to these key points. (One could be much less charitable and say that simply the whole movie falls flat, for how on earth could one be moved by these key moments when they were so falsely set up?) It seemed to me that the entire film, though set up in the in-vogue style of the interweaving plot, was an endless string of caricatures, and downright impossible coincidences if you add them all up together.
Bottom line: how can you have a relevant social commentary, if the movie is constructed of unrealistic events and actions?? It all rings false for me. Still I give it a 5/10 for those key moments.
Bottom line: how can you have a relevant social commentary, if the movie is constructed of unrealistic events and actions?? It all rings false for me. Still I give it a 5/10 for those key moments.
The Golden Voyage of Sinbad
(1973)
dated animation the only drawback to this fantastic tale
23 July 2005
If you are looking for an enjoyable adventure, full of swashbuckling heroics, colorful characters, and of course, the battle of good versus evil, then you've found it. All aspects of the production contribute to a fantastic tale of conflict, destiny and glory.
This is one of a series of Ray Harryhausen (animator/story) movies about Sinbad, the legendary sailor. He comes into possession of a shining gold object, and is soon drawn into a struggle between a benevolent kingdom and an evil sorcerer who both need it and will do almost anything to secure it. The sometimes mysterious, sometimes humorous, and sometimes beautiful characters Sinbad meets along the way are all wonderfully conceived and truly contribute to the story.
In the first ten minutes, this film shows its true colors as a fantasy. It will pull you in and keep you musing, wondering, and entertained mostly all the way through. There are a few lulls in the story, but this "breathing space" is a hallmark of the era in which the film was made, and only the the truly impatient will find them disrupting. The lands, stop-motion monsters, and mystical objects are colorful literally and metaphorically, making this journey highly enjoyable. To boot, Miklos Rosza has written a sparkling score that--along with mentions of Allah and destiny--provides a feeling of wonderment and exoticism as we glimpse into this great culture (though this is not a highly accurate presentation). Kids will love it, and adults too, especially if "act your age" is not your mantra. 8/10 for excitement, story, and best of all, atmosphere.
This is one of a series of Ray Harryhausen (animator/story) movies about Sinbad, the legendary sailor. He comes into possession of a shining gold object, and is soon drawn into a struggle between a benevolent kingdom and an evil sorcerer who both need it and will do almost anything to secure it. The sometimes mysterious, sometimes humorous, and sometimes beautiful characters Sinbad meets along the way are all wonderfully conceived and truly contribute to the story.
In the first ten minutes, this film shows its true colors as a fantasy. It will pull you in and keep you musing, wondering, and entertained mostly all the way through. There are a few lulls in the story, but this "breathing space" is a hallmark of the era in which the film was made, and only the the truly impatient will find them disrupting. The lands, stop-motion monsters, and mystical objects are colorful literally and metaphorically, making this journey highly enjoyable. To boot, Miklos Rosza has written a sparkling score that--along with mentions of Allah and destiny--provides a feeling of wonderment and exoticism as we glimpse into this great culture (though this is not a highly accurate presentation). Kids will love it, and adults too, especially if "act your age" is not your mantra. 8/10 for excitement, story, and best of all, atmosphere.
The Mephisto Waltz
(1971)
Give me more of this!
15 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Call it good cult fodder. Call it dated. Call it crazy. I say there should be more of it.
This "70's horror flick" comes complete with psychedelic dream sequences, devil-worshiping, terrifying morally bankrupt characters, and even a little campy acting. I've read it all--reviewers calling it dated, shoddily made, badly acted, wandering, and unfocused. However in my eyes, it is still a gem in spite of some of these things, and indeed because of some of them. Since the crazy 19th century came along, many an artwork has dealt with the supernatural, witchcraft, satanism, dreams and reality, etc. BUT very few works of art ever tell it in a style that reflects it. Very few films about the occult draw the viewer/listener/reader in so close that they realize they almost understand and are living in the strange world they view, and they are TERRIFIED as a result. This movie, and others like it, seek to do just that. Unfortunately, some techniques--like psychedelia--have become dated, though they are attempts at bridging the distance to the viewer with strange, maybe entrancing, maybe hypnotizing sounds and images. But were the first primitive musical notes thrown out? Were our first movies deemed a waste of time by the whole world? No, some chose to progress in the art, and the results have expanded our knowledge of ourselves. We shouldn't let a couple, now "dated," attempts be the end of it. We should keep trying to tell terrifying stories in a terrifying way. We should keep describing insanity, the diabolical, and the metaphysical using methods that get at the heart of the feelings, the other-worldy realities, the utterly foreign aspects of our world and of ourselves. At least, they were foreign until now! For this reason, and in spite of some true camp, this "weirdly" edited, acted, and directed story gets a 7 out of 10.
This "70's horror flick" comes complete with psychedelic dream sequences, devil-worshiping, terrifying morally bankrupt characters, and even a little campy acting. I've read it all--reviewers calling it dated, shoddily made, badly acted, wandering, and unfocused. However in my eyes, it is still a gem in spite of some of these things, and indeed because of some of them. Since the crazy 19th century came along, many an artwork has dealt with the supernatural, witchcraft, satanism, dreams and reality, etc. BUT very few works of art ever tell it in a style that reflects it. Very few films about the occult draw the viewer/listener/reader in so close that they realize they almost understand and are living in the strange world they view, and they are TERRIFIED as a result. This movie, and others like it, seek to do just that. Unfortunately, some techniques--like psychedelia--have become dated, though they are attempts at bridging the distance to the viewer with strange, maybe entrancing, maybe hypnotizing sounds and images. But were the first primitive musical notes thrown out? Were our first movies deemed a waste of time by the whole world? No, some chose to progress in the art, and the results have expanded our knowledge of ourselves. We shouldn't let a couple, now "dated," attempts be the end of it. We should keep trying to tell terrifying stories in a terrifying way. We should keep describing insanity, the diabolical, and the metaphysical using methods that get at the heart of the feelings, the other-worldy realities, the utterly foreign aspects of our world and of ourselves. At least, they were foreign until now! For this reason, and in spite of some true camp, this "weirdly" edited, acted, and directed story gets a 7 out of 10.
The Grifters
(1990)
John Cusack is annoying, except in this movie
5 January 2005
So first Cusack, then the film. Halfway through High Fidelity, I wanted to put myself out of my misery. Cusack plays a self-absorbed loser-type, or to put it another way, he is what happens when an asshole loses all hope/energy, and just pities himself constantly (for not having a girl) instead of criticizing himself. Turns out this is the guy he plays in almost every film. (Sure Thing comes to mind, though that movie got the Hollywood ending so he actually ends up with a girl.) I hate that guy! So naturally I was expecting more of the same from The Grifters, but to tell you the truth, I was pleasantly surprised. His character was definitely a down guy (grifter means con artist), with lots of troubles, but he didn't seem to harp on anything too much--he actually seemed to have a little determination to clean up his mess. I still was slightly annoyed though. So there it is, take a picture, I doubt it will ever happen again.
Now the film. I'm 23 so I figure I get to be both serious and sophomoric:
Serious-- The movie achieves that "cool" aura. To put it in a nut shell, the colors and camera angles convey well the style of a noir, and a thriller. Bernstein's score is enough 80's to be cool in that 80's way, but not enough to be too dated. It really supports the thriller aspect of the film and shows that he truly is heir apparent to Bernard Herrmann (Psycho, 1960). And aside from Cusack, I really like the other two main characters. Huston has something about her, and she plays those eery scenes (not going to spoil it) really well. And Benning gives us a lot in this movie in terms of character.
Sophomoric-- Benning really gives us "a lot" in the form of, well, getting naked A LOT. Sorry to alienate you folks who thought I had a brain only. Anyway to continue, Cusack's misfortunes seem almost fun to watch--Ha. And even the veteran Angelica Huston turned my head a few times. Not nearly as much as Benning!!!
Weighing all the good stuff against Cusack, it gets a 7/10.
Now the film. I'm 23 so I figure I get to be both serious and sophomoric:
Serious-- The movie achieves that "cool" aura. To put it in a nut shell, the colors and camera angles convey well the style of a noir, and a thriller. Bernstein's score is enough 80's to be cool in that 80's way, but not enough to be too dated. It really supports the thriller aspect of the film and shows that he truly is heir apparent to Bernard Herrmann (Psycho, 1960). And aside from Cusack, I really like the other two main characters. Huston has something about her, and she plays those eery scenes (not going to spoil it) really well. And Benning gives us a lot in this movie in terms of character.
Sophomoric-- Benning really gives us "a lot" in the form of, well, getting naked A LOT. Sorry to alienate you folks who thought I had a brain only. Anyway to continue, Cusack's misfortunes seem almost fun to watch--Ha. And even the veteran Angelica Huston turned my head a few times. Not nearly as much as Benning!!!
Weighing all the good stuff against Cusack, it gets a 7/10.
Tell Your Friends