Change Your Image
tylerkom
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Dunkirk (2017)
Nolan's Least Ambitious Work Yet
Dunkirk is a World War II action thriller written and directed by a true giant of Hollywood: Christopher Nolan. Nolan's greatest strength as a filmmaker is his ability to take tried-and-true film archetypes and reimagine them in refreshing and thrilling ways. Before the film was released, he claimed that he would do the same to the classic war film with Dunkirk, saying that "this is my most experimental film since Memento". Unfortunately, the reality is far from the case.
Dunkirk is very competently put together as a film from a master director like Nolan should be. It is very nice to look at; the wide shots are epic, and the action sequences look consistently great. It is also one of Nolan's most intelligible films, as the sound mixing actually lets you hear the very little dialogue there actually is. The plot is very easy to follow even with the slightly off-kilter non-linear storytelling. It's just a very solid film that doesn't overstay its welcome; it comes in to tell a little story about WWII with little to no character depth and gets out.
However, it is this very fact that puzzles me. It's such a standard war film that it's baffling to me how Nolan saw this as an experimental work. Sure, the slightly non-linear story adds a bit of flair, but it is nothing that hasn't been done in a thousand other war films. The characters express their personalities by body language and few lines of dialogue; Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket, Band of Brothers do it better. There is a civilian element to the story: many modern war films include this. I'm just not seeing what is special about this film. And that's really a disappointment coming from my favorite modern director. In some ways, I would have appreciated Dunkirk more if Nolan tried something crazy and completely flopped (as was the case with Tenet).
Little risked was little gained in the case of Dunkirk. It is a slickly produced war film that is enjoyable but will not stick with the filmgoing public beyond its box office shelf life.
Incendies (2010)
Tragedy is Back on the Menu
Incendies is an astonishing film by Denis Villeneuve, who has been carving out a notable legacy for himself in Hollywood. It's no wonder why-his films are infused with artistry and passion, and "Incendies" continues this trend. However, its greatest achievement lies in reviving the tragedy genre. How often do we see tragedy films garner vast critical recognition? Almost never. They're notoriously difficult to sell, so the goal here was to create an exceptional film and hope for the best. While I suspect this film may have incurred losses, it undeniably achieved its primary objective.
The lead actors, Lubna Azabal and Melissa Poulin, deliver profoundly authentic performances. Despite the somewhat sparse material, they manage to extract depth from it. The twist in the film is superb; the climax unfolds in a satisfying manner, with the audience grasping the truth about Abu Tarek moments before the characters. It's a nod to the classical Greek and Roman masterpieces. Similarly, the screenplay shines, seamlessly blending dark themes into the mainstream-a rare feat indeed.
The film's flaws are minor, akin to those found in ancient Greek tragedies. It occasionally suffers from slow pacing, with some Chekhovian guns left unfired by the end. This might be an intentional misdirection by the director to obscure the tragic arc, but some scenes could have been trimmed for relevance. Lastly, while the subpar special effects are inconsequential due to strong set design and character-driven narrative, they are noticeable in action sequences. Certain scenes, particularly those involving gunfire, exude an amateurish quality.
Overall, Incendies stands as a rare gem of tragic art in mainstream cinema, deserving of a hero's celebration.
Warrior (2011)
How Long Can You Suspend Disbelief?
How long do we suspend disbelief? I ask this because it probably completely changes the level of enjoyment one will have from this film. Why? As a character study, it is excellent. The characters are deep and nuanced, intentional in their flaws and virtues. The dialogue is raw and real, and we have some truly excellent performances by Tom Hardy and Nick Nolte, the latter of whom was rightfully nominated for an Oscar for his performance. So far so good, right?
This is where my central issue with this film lies. I'm not going to come in here and tell you that all of the Avengers films are unwatchable because superheroes don't exist. The universe created has superheroes, and the films play by those rules. However, this film is theoretically placed in the 'real world' and attempts a gritty and gray take on reality. With that in mind, the notion that a washed-up fighter and untrained former high school champion can come in and beat THE BEST IN THE WORLD at what they do is laughable at best and completely nonsensical. I mean, the film doesn't even try to make sense of it all. Can you imagine these random fools beating LeBron James, Michael Jordan, Messi, Ronaldo, Anderson Silva, Tiger Woods, etc. In a 1v1 tournament of their respective sports? Even the iconic first Rocky film did not try to make such a claim. Rocky actually trained for months just to get beat up for 10 rounds with the world champ, with the central theme of never giving up and keeping that warrior spirit. However, in this film, it seems like these 2 brothers with only limited prep and MMA training are just breezing through THE BEST FIGHTERS IN THE WORLD with pure natural skill. Let me repeat: THIS MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Even the great sports miracles like Miracle on Ice had aspects of teamwork and luck that made everything come together. The portrayal in this film is that these guys are just better than all the other dudes who spent their entire life training MMA. Sure.
And normally, I wouldn't make such a big deal about a film's premise like this, but the problem with this film in particular is that the mixed martial arts tournament that they are in is the main plot device driving the clashing, growth, and eventual catharsis of the two main characters. But how is the audience supposed to understand this growth when the medium for it is so counterfeit? I think perhaps the plot device could have been a lot stronger if the tournament was a Pennsylvania regional tournament, or something of the like, with the relevant needed rewrites for the other loose ends this would create.
In any case, the validity of this review will rest on you: do you agree that this premise is so insane that the entire film is ruined? Or can you accept this and move on? And where is your line to which you can suspend disbelief? Despite it being a great emotional character study, this one is falling apart at the seams.
Oppenheimer (2023)
Ambition Paid Off
It's amazing that Christopher Nolan can just get away with this. Turning a biopic into a feature film? Difficult, but doable. Turning a biopic that mostly takes place in well-lit labs and courtrooms into a thriller? It is extremely unclear. But that's what makes Nolan a visionary.
This is fundamentally an almost flawless film. Firstly and most importantly, it is such a treat for the eyes. The color palette is so nostalgic and warm, and the shots and locations are stunning. It is nothing short of an absolute achievement in cinematography. And the editing throughout? Quick cuts in and out to particles, explosions, and centrifuges bring life to the ideas behind Oppenheimer's eyes. It is simply stunning as a visual piece. I'll disagree slightly with the crowd here and say that the actor performances overall were good but not incredible. Highly serviceable and Cillian Murphy does a great job, but to me, the film is more about the theatrics of the whole thing as opposed to a character-driven narrative. Nonetheless, I will give praise to Emily Blunt who I think did the most with what she was given. A great, great performance. Ludwig Göransson provides a solid soundtrack, entirely serviceable and actually quite compelling, if not somewhat less memorable than the soundtracks for Nolan's other films.
But the biggest applause must go to the storytelling and directing. It is a small wonder that the film is so understandable despite there being what feels like a million characters entering and leaving at any given time. The artistic choice to go for a non-linear timeline is a very Nolan one, and it is captivating. I was at the edge of my seat for almost the entire film, despite not exactly being able to put my finger on why. Such is the magic of Nolan. And the twist! How can there be a twist in a freaking biopic?!?! It felt natural and composed beautifully. It is perhaps this film's perfect shining moment. To explain the betrayal of Strauss at the exact right moment in a film that should have been smooth sailing to the end. Class.
One last thing: this film has the most clearly developed themes of any Nolan film to date. Without the constant threat of death from otherworldly beings, being stuck in dreams, being blown up by fighter planes, Nolan gets to explore more of the faces of each character. For Oppenheimer in particular, we see the good and the ugly, without an obvious moral answer to which Nolan usually points us. I really, really enjoy how contemplative the film becomes near the end. And the closing theme that every character in the film is selfish, doing 'it' for themselves? Provided by Albert Freaking Einstein? Wonderful. In my opinion, doing the Walter White "all the things that I did...I did it for me" idea even better than Breaking Bad.
Okay, some closing criticisms since I lavished so much praise. There is so much content in the film, and while Nolan does a great job of making things understandable and sequenced in a followable manner, the film can occasionally suffer from Nolan's famous breakneck pacing. No, not as bad as Tenet in any way, but there are still moments where the viewer has to recollect themselves to understand where the scene went. Following with the theme of Nolan-themed criticisms, there are some lines in the film that are a bit too picture-perfect. I did roll my eyes once at Matt Damon talking about the Manhattan Project being the most important thing in all of history in a huffed-up anger. It is very Nolan to have a cheesy line in there every now and then, and it is mostly excusable.
Oppenheimer will go down in film history as one of the great ambitious films that absolutely paid off. It is captivating visually and mentally. While I did not necessarily resonate with all of the film's choices, the film itself is very close to flawless and a pleasure to watch.
The Kid (1921)
Timeless
Charlie Chaplin is the face of the silent film era for a reason. His use of slapstick comedy to tell timeless stories is iconic, and with "The Kid," he is at the absolute peak of his game. The trouble with reviewing films that are over 100 years old is that sometimes the entertainment value can be marred by the outdated mode of storytelling and/or technical specs. Thankfully, this is not the case with "The Kid."
The storytelling itself is extremely tight, with little fluff to distract from the scene. The use of dialogue cards is sparse, and yet the dialogue and emotional beats feel wonderfully full. The storytelling is simply excellent and so engaging. A huge point in "The Kid's" favor is the (somewhat) lower reliance on physical comedy. Of course, this is a hallmark of the era; however, there is a lot more going on character-wise in the story than just enjoyable choreographed sequences (of which there are many). Another point of excellence is the attention to detail in cinematic framing. The cinematography is just fantastic-at times even stunning. The cinematographer was never lazy with his shots, and every single cutaway was made with some framing concept in mind. It is genuinely better shot than a lot of modern films and uses the semi-square 4:3 ratio to perfection. The comedy beats are timeless and rely on more than just hitting baddies on the head with various items, although this comedy beat still does make an appearance, as per the era. And finally, the conclusion to the film is both satisfying and believable. Sometimes older films can be a bit beholden to the corniness of the era, but Chaplin brings a satisfying bit of maturity to this ending in making sure "The Kid" still has a dad.
As near perfect as the film is, I'll still note that there is just the slightest hint of something forced in the plot. Without dialogue, it is definitely difficult to write dynamic character development, so the plot must be at the forefront. However, the slight set-piece nature of the plot takes away from the product a little for me. Despite that, which may not even be considered a flaw, Chaplin does something spectacular with so little in this film. A timeless masterpiece that will surely be enjoyed for another century to come.
Dangal (2016)
Vanilla Tastes Good, Too
Dangal is a family-oriented, coming-of-age sports film led by the legendary Bollywood icon, Aamir Khan. And, surprise surprise, it's pretty good-if you don't think too hard. I believe it successfully achieves everything it sets out to do: it's understandable, the characters are well-defined, and the overall movie arc is quite satisfying. I'll make an odd claim here and call it a Bollywood version of Top Gun: Maverick. In many ways, it's overly cheesy and has no right to work as well as it does, but you can't help but feel good watching the film.
The film itself is an extremely linear coming-of-age story. Actually, it excels when following its own formula: hardship to growth, hardship to growth. It's adept at creating believable scenarios and has really enjoyable beats throughout. The first half is easily its strongest point. We understand why young Babita and Geeta begin to resent their dad, and the growth into the climactic conflict is satisfying, logical, and downright fun. There's something very innocent and universal about the family humor in Indian films, and for the most part, it delivers. Aamir Khan's performance is consistently solid, and the supporting cast, especially Sakshi Tanwar as the mom, does commendable work. In short, most elements in this film just work. While its story and writing are excessively obvious, it avoids any terrible blunders throughout its runtime. Also, though I'm generally not a fan of every Indian film being a musical, the music scenes fit well. Only one dance scene is elegantly slotted into the story, and the rest are montages-palatable and fitting for my Western tastes.
While Dangal does "Vanilla" very well, there are certainly some puzzling missteps. One HUGE question I have for the film is what messages it's trying to send. For resolving the first great conflict of the film in which young Geeta and Babita resent their father and his iron-fisted parenting, the conflict is resolved by a 3-minute monologue from a character with a total of 5 minutes of screentime in the ENTIRE FILM. In short: "You guys should be happy that your father pushes you to insane lengths because my parents just want to marry me off and be rid of me. It shows that he cares." While the sentiment that the father deeply cares about his daughters is well met, I'm not understanding how Mahavir's frankly INSANE parenting practices can be excused. Right after this scene, all resentment disappears from the little girls, and they develop Kobe-Bryant-Michael-Jordan-esque work ethics for a sport that doesn't even seem like they enjoy. I know that Indian familial structures are stronger than Western notions of the same, but this conflict-resolution complex just doesn't make sense to me. Another "lesson" the movie pushes: don't listen to your coach; you should listen to your dad over everything. I really don't understand this lesson. Mahavir is so hurt and offended that Geeta learns new wrestling techniques, but I'm really not understanding why it's not reasonable to mix both the old and the new or to have a reasonable discussion about strategy and reasoning for technique. Not that Mahavir is any slouch in wrestling, but come on, surely the world isn't so black and white.
And I think that's a huge problem for this film. The one-dimensionality of the characters leads to a world that can only be portrayed in black and white. While this makes it reasonably satisfying and easy to follow for viewers, it loses me on how forcefully it believes in its own very disagreeable morals. In keeping with the tradition of Indian films being excessively cheesy, there is a super random villain arc at the end of the film pitting the national team coach against Mahavir. Again, the movie loses me here because the national team coach is portrayed as not only incompetent but also malicious. He is so cartoonishly evil that it really throws the viewer out of any semblance of immersion. He even resorts to the old-fashioned movie trope of locking the protagonist in a broom closet. How can the writers allow this? This arc really let me down for the last quarter of the film.
Given all these things, Dangal is a very good coming-of-age film. It really does almost everything it sets out to do. It's funny, understandable, and intentional. It's really basic, very linear, Disney-channel-esque. And like Top Gun: Maverick, it is excessively Vanilla. But you know what? Sometimes vanilla is all you need.
The Apartment (1960)
An Old Classic With Modern Sensibilities
The Apartment 1960 is a classic for all the right reasons. Its performances are expressive, the editing is sharp, the directing is sharper. It's an old comedy with timeless comedic beats and numerous great subplots. But many films also share in these qualities. No, the thing that sets The Apartment apart from the rest is its refreshingly rare sense of realism in an era known for stiffer performances and theartre-like dialogue.
The plot kept me turning, building and releasing tension at the director's whim. While the plot in the macro is not so groundbreaking in retrospect, it is the contast feeling that you won't know what is going to happen next that helps to make this watch so special. And despite having a very reasonable runtime of 2:05, the amount of subplot makes the film feel 3 hours long (in a good way). I loved moments like the secretary listening in on her director's conversation and vengfully exposing Sheldrake for his infidelity. Importantly, it was authentic to a character like that. Going away from the old Hollywood style tropes of instant earned love, the love is, at times tepid, at other times cruel. This was so so unexpected. Even in the ending, when you feel like the characters earned the love that they will rightfully receive, there is still a careful reservation for the courage it takes to step into the dungeon of love one more time. In a lesser film, the director would have had the main characters kissing with a fade to black. Instead we get something eqaully at satisfying and doubly as authentic.
The comedy is great, not over the top but actually very Joker-like. As in the my-life-isn't-a-tragedy-it's-a-comedy sort of way. It's fantastic. We cheer for great one liners like "not meeting a married man while wearing mascara". It's funny-sad and entirely on purpose.
Furthermore, there are occassionally very beautiful shots that really show the intelligence of the cinematophrager. It's difficult to make such beautiful frames with the format they had to work with, so that's to be applauded. Furthermore, the cinematic framing is thoughtful and makes sense throughout.
However, not everything is exactly perfect. The pacing is a little deranged, with what turns out to be a subplot taking up the entire first 30 minutes of the film. After that, the film really picks up and we are whirled through many situations and holidays. It's not the worst sin, but certainly the film could have been reedited slightly. Furthermore, every now and then, the dialogue succumbs to the sensibilities of the time. Sometimes characters leave the scene after saying a witty line in an overly dramatic and perfect way. It's a shame because these little moments break the immersion slightly and remind me that I am watching a film from the 1960s. Again, not the worst sin, but alas.
In any case, The Apartment stands far and away above the comedy dramas of all time and easily deserves its rightful place as a classic.
M - Eine Stadt sucht einen Mörder (1931)
The Shoulders We Stand On
M 1931 is a hallmark of the German Expressionist movement. Its context in a post WW1 Germany gives a certain grimness and frustration that is truly palpable throughout the film. Its place in history is well marked and celebrated for its commentary on the rising Nazi party and the need for togetherness in a tough era of rebuilding.
Okay. With all due respect squared away, I have to now make a bit of a turnaround and say that this film didn't do very much for me. Most of all, I found it boring and very odd at points. I'll start with the writing. I tend to enjoy the legendary films from this era due to their tight writing and use of all context in a scene. Without colors and exceptional sound, these are certainly needs for a great film in this time. However, the writing seemed a bit unfocused to me. At many points, I wondered if this had even been storyboarded at all, as there would be long stretches of scenes that go on for far far too long. At another level, the themes are somewhat unclear. There is something about togetherness, but this togetherness is in the context of greed. The monologue about insanity is interesting, but how does it fit into all this? Of course, this is, theoretically, an abstract film, but I can't help but feel like I'm missing something in what it is trying to say. Certainly there are some themes about the failings of authority, but that doesn't seem to be its thesis. Not that a great film needs to have strong theme, but alas.
Another point that dates the film for me are the very odd cinematography choices. There are some very weird shots laced throughout the film that range from amateurish to downright odd. I don't really know what to think about this except that the cinematographer was just given free reign to have some fun doing some experimental stuff. Which is completely fine, I am just not sure about how well the experiments meshed with what the film is trying to achieve.
I see this film as a great grandfather to the great films of today and yesterday. I think there would be an interesting argument linking the oddities and abstractness of the writing to something like Kubrick's Clockwork Orange. Another line could be drawn between the framing choices in this film and the shots common in arthouse filmography today. In this way, M is a monument. It was a great and powerful film at its time, although the things that once made it great have been surpassed by the children from which it spawned.
Logan (2017)
A straightforward superhero film
Logan, made in the wake of Nolan's universally acclaimed batman trilogy is the superhero genre, after dark. In light of this as well as its reputation as one of the great superhero films, I was expecting a dark and subversive character thriller. And I got that. Kinda.
A very much plot driven film, the arcs and beats are extremely telegraphed to the audience. So much so that multiple times, I was predicting beats in the film 10 minutes before they happened. Yes, the more realistic take on a washed up hero is somewhat interesting, but as we get into the meat of the film, the story gets more and more predictable. It really is just your average 3 act superhero film. I did really enjoy the subversions written in with the level of gore and occasional unexpected interaction. However, it doesn't change the fact that the high level and medium level storytelling is the exact same as any other marvel film.
Okay, now some good things to say about the film. Jackman's performance is really great. It's visceral and ferocious, like the hero he plays. Stewart was good as well, funny beats and believable performance. The film visually looks good, not great, but good. Action sequences with a lot of wide shots was great.
Final sour point: I know this has been beaten to death, but on average kids are terrible actors. This film isn't an exception. Dafne Keen, especially when speaking is a lower point in the film. Of course, this is more a flaw with the real world as opposed to a flaw with the writing/directing, but still.
All in all, I'm not really seeing the hype for this film. Whereas Nolan's batman ascends beyond the superhero genre, Logan stays firmly within it. Perhaps near the top.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
The greatest hallmark-ish film ever
For me there is always some great comfort in the grainy technically terrible looking films from the early and mid 2000's. Maybe it's the nostalgia, or maybe it's the joy of seeing now beloved actors working in their prime. But with this comfort comes the paired bracing for a bad film that needs the seasoning of nostalgia to be palatable. And for the beginning of Eternal Sunshine, this looked to be the case. The frantic and chopped up cinematography with a sickly sweet love story looked like the appetizer for some 2000's romcom mediocrity. Imagine surprise then when this turned into an Inception-before-inception trip packaged in a romantic drama.
The acting from the two leads, Jim Carry and Kate Winslet are absolutely top notch. Believable, frantic, frustratingly real with their own stubbornness and idiosyncrasies. Simply great. And let me give credit as well for the thematics of the entire film. It is happy and hopeful yet tinged with a desperation in the passage of time and of decisions regretted. Moreover, the technical side of the film has aged surprisingly very well. The CGI special effects are used tastefully and sparingly and is possibly going to age even better than its 2010's pseudo analog in Inception. The scenes that probably never looked good were the ones that played with size and perspective; it was a fun try but ultimately not all that successful. Kaufman and Gondry make the non-linear storytelling a breeze to ride for the audience and should be applauded for their edits to the original schizophrenia of the original script. I also did not realize Mark Ruffalo was in this film until he took off his glasses which gave me a great laugh.
There is not all that much to complain about with the film. I suppose there is some level of deus ex machina in the ending but with suspended belief, we can accept some of it. I think that perhaps one of the solutions that the main characters try seems more plausible, but I digress.
I really wonder coming out of the film whether the writers knew they had a gem on their hands as opposed to a decent fun holiday(ish?) film. It certainly is only a few decisions from turning from Oscar-bait into a Hallmark film. Fortunately for us, we got the good ending.
The Menu (2022)
Very good but not great
Oh yes, this was a fun one. Don't be fooled by the trailers and movie previews, The Menu is a (very good) dark comedy through and through. The film pokes fun at the sophisticated snobbish foodie culture that we see a lot of today and does not take itself too seriously in the meantime.
The writing does almost all of the legwork for the enjoyment of the film. It is smart and witty and devolves into something dark and hilariously satirical. It is an absolute joy to see the characters interact at their separate tables and learn more about what drives them and where they come from. The writers make great use of 'show don't tell', not giving us more than a couple minutes of exposition at the beginning of the film. The acting by Ralph Fiennes is great; he does an excellent job at portraying the grand chef that takes himself a bit too seriously. Anya Taylor Joy is pretty decent in the lead with no obvious issues and she exactly portrays the character she is meant to be. Perhaps a bit too pretty though from a casting decision standpoint. The other lead in Nicholas Hoult is a bit of a red herring and there is not much to say because his character turns into a walking joke by the end of the film.
The issues of the film come from the lack of creativity beyond the writing. It is all serviceable but I can't help but think that so much more could have been done. The cinematography is completely generic (although serviceable), the color palette is muted (and generic), the set and costume design is average and perhaps a bit too on the nose (excusable for a satire film, I suppose). I can't help but wonder how interesting the film could be if it was a bit more daring in any of these other categories. I think it could have been incredible in a one-set 12 Angry Men-esque bottle scene or with more interesting cinematography.
So instead of being great, it is simply very good. Everyone who is into food culture or has hobbies that they are passionate about should watch this film. The critiques are cutting and yet unserious when they come from an unreliable critic. Or don't worry about how good the film is at all and just enjoy the ride...
The Departed (2006)
Gritty and Goofy
The departed is a film with a premise that was a surefire hit from the start. Adapted from an Asian film of the same premise, the story is sharp and the world is funny in that silly and corrupt Scorsese way. It is very well paced, and the story arc is exceedingly well thought out. I can't say enough good things about the set pieces, and the tension is right where Scorsese wants it at any given time.
Where this film missteps is in the cartoonish nature of some of the characters. Without spoiling the film itself, Jack Nicholson gives his best performance to a character that really isn't that compelling. It is not a spoiler to note that Nicholson's character often contradicts his own context. He is supposed to be highly rational, yet sometimes acts very irrationally. Odd. Very goofy at times. In fact, Nicholson's character reminds me of a poorly written Joker from Nolan's The Dark Knight; it didn't quite hit the mark.
At other times, the rest characters seem to succumb to the cheesiness of the dialogue and plots Scorsese puts together.
In summary, this is a good film with some one dimensional main characters. Some subplots save the depth of the film, but what you see is what you get most of the time.
L.A. Confidential (1997)
Witty and Sharp
This is the absolute gold standard for noir. The film is snappy and sharp; the plot moves quickly but gives just enough clues to follow. The acting is phenomenal by each of the main characters and the slimy corrupt world of Los Angeles comes alive.
The plot is smart and believable, although slightly too fast for my liking. This is exacerbated by the copious usage of 1950s slang and show business jargon. There is a lot more to be gained from the film by pausing every now and then to pick up exactly what the characters say and what exactly happened.
However with that said, the rest of the film is simply fantastic. The set and costume design is outstanding, and the leads do exactly what they are cast to do.
Layered and nuanced, the film uncovers the filthy underbelly of public and private life in the city of the angels. Brilliantly fun.
Mortal Kombat (2021)
Laughably bad
I watched this film with a bunch of guys that are very familiar with the Mortal Kombat universe and games. As far as faithfulness to the source material, the film does a great job of stuffing the action full of game references and one-liners that are sure to make fans of the franchise smile.
However, as a film, this is god awful. There is absolutely no sense of pacing whatsoever; the film moves at a blistering pace. The plot is almost non-existent. Instead there are lots of action sequences in which the CGI looks a little shoddy. The lack of plot may not bother others, but there are so many unexplained sequences in the film that at some point you have to shrug your shoulders and just enjoy the action sequences that have been put together. The acting is pretty bad, the dialogue is worse, and the movie ends with no story arc.
It's a fun watch for making fun of the film or chilling with a bunch of your friends. Beware though - this movie sucks!
Jiro Dreams of Sushi (2011)
When you love what you do, you never work a day in your life
This is a very well produced documentary about Jiro - perhaps the greatest sushi chef in the world. Every stereotype about the trials and tribulations in ascending to the top of the sushi world are present in this small peek into Jiro's life.
Simple with a compelling story to tell, there's really not much to say about this documentary. If you love food, or wish to understand why we love food, then watch this documentary. Quaint, simple, fascinating.
Bad Trip (2021)
One of the best movies of its genre
Bad trip knows exactly what it is and does its job at a very high level. It keeps itself very light, with all pranks met up meticulously well. It never overstayed its welcome and leans heavily into the shock comedy that got Eric Andre famous in the first place.
The best part of the film is what it does not do. It doesn't take itself very seriously, and it does not take away from the pranks by going down an odd and unneeded plotline (see: Borat).
Some pranks are better than others and some points seemed a bit strained for ideas, however it's a very good film as a whole.
Truly one of the best in the loosely-tied-together-prank genre.
Roof Culture Asia (2017)
A surprising and slick film with great character
I'm not a parkour person at all, but stumbled upon this film after a trek into the YouTube comments section. I gotta say that I was pleasantly surprised about the way the whole thing was put together.
It's edited very nicely, the colors are very cool, adding to the gritty atmosphere. The guys themselves are a bit corny, but you can tell they really feel passionately about this project. even though this project was just a small blip in the history of the world, the for the duration of the film, they make you feel as though it Matters with a capital M.
A nice entertaining look into the world of parkour, the film doesn't require a lot of attention while delivering on a lot of thrills.
Ah-ga-ssi (2016)
Sexy, sharp, and stunning
This is undeniably one of the greatest films I have ever had the pleasure of watching. It takes the best aspects of your favorite films and directors and puts it into a deliciously show stopping package. It is the sharp societal commentary of Parasite. The creativity and absurdity of Oldboy. The fun of Tarantino. The shock of a Fincher film.
The film is shot gorgeously. The cinematographer had an absolute field day putting the shots together for this. The set design is immaculate. The writing is witty but easy to follow for someone reading subtitles. The colors of the film are a little uninspired but particular scenes looked absolutely fantastical.
Without spoiling the plot of the film, I will say that the plot is mostly classical, although the execution is masterpiece level creative. It is an absolute joy to watch even when the next 10 minutes are spelled out for you.
The pacing is fantastic, although the film slows down significantly just after the halfway point. This isn't necessarily a problem, as this lowered momentum is used as set up time for the closing act.
If nothing else, this film has some ICON scenes that took me straight to my core. These are scenes like "luke, I am your father" or the end of the usual suspects which make us love cinema.
Park has shown that he is one of the greatest in the world at his craft.
Tonari no Totoro (1988)
Bright, fun, and wonderous
My Neighbor Totoro is a wonderful film that captures the childlike magic that we all once had. It is fun, carefree, and free flowing. There is no real plot; there are just bits of wonder and excitement as we follow Satsuki and Mei through solving problems and facing the dark fears that the world can hold.
Miyazaki is the absolute best at maintaining an ethereal surrealist quality to his films - and Totoro is no different. It is one of the cutest films I've ever seen, and one of the most delicately beautiful. It is not made up of powerful moments, but silent expressions and realizations that we share with our characters. Every character in the film has their own life and views on the world. These are far and few between, but these characters show up that the world is not so scary when we choose not to see it that way.
Of course, the art style has aged decently well compared to anime films that came out around the same time, and Joe Hishaishi's score is absolutely perfect for the film.
I'm quite sure this won't be a film that changes your life, but it is one that will remind you of the magic in the world around us.
Joker (2019)
An interesting vision that doesn't quite land
I really love the premise of Joker. A non-canonical vision of the origin story of the most beloved villain in all of comic books, this had success written all over it. Unfortunately, I believe the stakes were not compelling enough for the film to have the effect that it wanted to have.
For example, this film tries its hand at a surrealist Gotham city but takes half measures with this level of surrealism. At times, the surrealism is quite powerful. At others, it is just cartoonish. The cartoonish moments are the ones that really hurt the film in my eyes, especially as it is supposed to be a very gritty and dark interpretation of the Batman universe. The dialogue can be very real and raw at times but painfully clumsy at others. The unreliable narrator also feels uncompelling. It doesn't really add to the narrative at all; it simply adds (or perhaps removes) context from the narrative which is already largely plotless. There are other problems, but I would summarize them to be that we don't really have a reason to root for the main character. He certainly isn't a "good guy" (although he isn't necessarily a bad guy either). As an aside, I'd like to note that the "fan service" to the Batman universe in this film was very clumsy and perhaps the writers could have done better in this respect.
However, the film is not without its great moments. It is brilliantly shot and color graded. Everything fits the film exactly as it should and serves only to enhance the experience. The are many scenes that are downright hilarious in a black comedy type of way. From the shot selection, to the music, to the way they play out, I loved many of these scenes. Furthermore, I would be remiss if I did not mention Joaquin Phoenix's great performance. In my eyes, he was better than the actual film.
Overall, I really liked some pieces of the film, but the entire narrative that strings it together is pretty weak. I have also been told that this film is essentially the exact same as Scorsese's Taxi Driver although I cannot verify, this is a pretty common criticism.
Oldeuboi (2003)
Absolutely stunning
Chan-wook Park had a vision. A vision that this film would pull on all the senses. The disgust of taboo, the despair of loneliness, the hilarity of tradgedy. Oldboy mixes a bit of Tarantino with a lot of Kubrick in a thriller that does almost everything right.
The writing is fantastic. It is visionary and spacious. It is artistic and playful. It is definitely not a 'realistic' film. Although the pace is whiplash inducing, the film always manages to get across its point. It is cold, then it is warm. It is utterly tragic and then it is hilarious. The cinematography is innovative and memorable. The action sequences are unbelievably fun to watch. The choreography was simply beautiful.
It's hard to describe a film like this which I feel has certain...problems but somehow it would not be doing the film justice to give it less than the highest praise that I can award it. I believe this can be a timeless film that all aspiring art film producers must watch and learn from for time in perpetuum. Not every director can make an 'Oldboy', and it's not clear that Park could even do it again. These are once-in-a-career type films. The very definition of a magnum opus.
1917 (2019)
A technical marvel
Sam Mendes' second attempt at a war film shows us that there is still innovation to be had in this genre. The amount of planning and thought that went into this film is absolutely astounding. The long shot sequences without an (obvious) cut as great and the performances are fantastic by all involved.
It is a very solid film with realistic writing, exciting and realistic events, and a pressing issue that we are constantly reminded of.
My main issue with the film stems from the lack of characterization. There seem to be a lot of throwaway lines concerning the relationship between the main characters that I really wish we had seen more of. I realize that this film depicts these soldiers as just "one of many", but the mere fact that there are SO MANY of these intimate moments between the main characters makes the film seem flip-floppy on this decision.
Besides this, it is wonderfully solid on all fronts, although the ending didn't really wow me the same way the rest of the movie did. All in all, a very solid film that did a lot right, but was a little emotionally muted for my taste.
Salinui chueok (2003)
A tasteful and clean thriller
Bong Joon Ho's Memories of Murder is an absolutely stunning film. Tightly filmed and cleanly written, we follow detectives as they deal with their own lives and their ongoing investigation into the murders in their municipal district.
The character development is very strong and the film simply tears you apart. This is a rare film that makes all other films in the genre better by existing. We get a raw look at what the detectives are going through, and the results of their conclusions have extremely consequential results.
I must also give a huge congratulations for the soundtrack/sound design in the film. Even while filmed on a tighter budget, this is a real professional thriller with the feel of a fresh indie film.
Deep and refreshing. An incredible achievement from the director.
Rear Window (1954)
A masterclass in tension
In a real masterclass in filmmaking, Hitchcock delivers once again with a stunning one-set thriller. The details are fantastic and the motifs are so deep and thoughtful. There is real character development within the short runtime and the plot gives us all perspectives of what may have happened one fateful night.
Very reminiscent of Twelve Angry Men, Hitchcock does absolute justice in this niche genre of stay-in-place mystery thrillers. There are countless subplots and the performances are wonderful. There simply isn't much i can say that is bad about this film - but allow me to try.
The main character's notion is far fetched at best and delusional at worst. Hitchcock does a good job in bringing a sobering foil character to temper this notion that the main character has, but of course this notion will still drive the ENTIRE PLOT. Besides this, some of the 'evidence' that they find is weak and would lead any sane person away from their conclusion. Somehow all of this doesn't matter though - Hitchcock's writing finds a way to make all of this drama work together beautifully.
A truly Great film.
Hamilton (2020)
A theater nerd's dream
The legendary Hamilton shook theater fans to the core when it came down and swept the Tony awards. It took a while to get to the silver screen, but here we are.
Firstly, if you do not like musicals you will completely hate this film. There are about 4 lines of dialogue in the entire duration. Furthermore, it has this very comical "quirkiness" to it that brightens up the atmosphere but simultaneously takes away from the whole narrative of it. I really don't have too much to say about this. The music was good, the acting good as well. The performances were nice and the stage setups were well done. The fourth wall breaks felt a bit tired at a point but perhaps that is a matter of my own taste.
A worthwhile watch but a piece that I do not believe to be lifechanging.