Hold Me Tight 8/10
Vicky Krieps gives a performance as solid as her breakout role in Phantom Thread as a woman who leaves her family to find herself as her husband and children learn to live with without her...or is she emotionally disturbed and imagining everything? Mathieu Amalric's direction is sure-handed and unpretentious as he avoids schmaltz and cliches as he puts emphasis on characters and story and keeps you guessing as the film goes on. The performance of the actress playing the daughter in the later scenes is also really good and I could see her going onto bigger projects. Going into further detail about the plot would be a big spoiler so it's best to go in fresh. You won't be disappointed.
Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Moderators: Buscemi, BarcaRulz, Geezer, W
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
A few from the recent batch
You Won't Be Alone: 7/10
A very surprising folk-horror, best described as Malick-Meet-Eggers, with a dash of Herzog. Starting with a witch cursing a baby, it follows her growth to adulthood and eventually the realisation that she is a with, as she infiltrates humanity in an attempt to understand it, and reject the destructive teachers of her surrogate mother. Through internal monologues we get a sense of wonder and curiosity, with an occasional critique of the essence of who we are. It's beautiful and occasionally gruesome, and altogether a very unique film.
Emily the Criminal: 7/10
Further proof, if it was ever needed, that Aubrey Plaza is a fine, if not under-rated actress. Here she plays a troubled woman who tries to get a regular job, but is lured into the somewhat grey territory of consume fraud, only to get a taste for more. The realistic world and fast plotting makes for a compelling story, even if the ending isn't wholly satisfying.
Aftersun: 6/10
A slow and gentle character study, functioning as a sort of memory as a woman looks back on what was probably her last holiday with her father, when she was 11 and he was in his early 30s, and perhaps too young to fully accept his responsibility. Most films would reach for the jugular, but instead we see very brief moments of sadness in the father, and moments of yearing for the daughter to become her own person. Subtle hints lead us to assume the worst, but this isn't a film of reveals, but rather one of how we can often miss the signs.
Burning Days: 7/10
It's Turkey's answer to Chinatown. A young lawyer gets a good job in a small Turkish town, only to discover its backwater mentality leads him to water abuse and sinkholes. But very quikly he finds himself involved in a rape case in which he may have played a part in. While investigating the case and trying to piece together his own memories, we uncover a tale a illicit desire and a town on the verge of war amidst a local election. It's an elusive film with a taut, intense climax.
The Beasts: 7/10
Tense French/Spanish drama about a French/Spanish man who moves back to his old Galician hometown to fix up the houses and attract tourists, only to face ire from the local farmers who resent this blow-in, particularly when he convinced many to turn down the sale of the land to a windmill farm. Thus begins a conflict between our hero and one of the nastier farmers, which esclates into gut-churming war. It's a smart film that tries to see both sides, with some great dialogue scenes and a rather horrid third act that instead tells the story from the POV of the hero's wife. Despite one aspect of the story I didn't buy, this was nevertheless an impressive demonstration of the misunderstandings between classes.
The Woodcutter's Story: 6/10
A very strange Finnish film about a small wood-mill community. Mostly following a rather weak father, whose friend grows increasingly jealous of the man he thinks his wife is having an affair with, it's a quirky selection of moments, perhaps building up to a more important story about repressed desires. It's Lynch meets Kauismaki. Fascinating.
Saw plenty of other good films, some solid, like Funny Pages (the ugliest film I've seen in a while), Boy From Heaven (a fascinating world) and Athena (immersive if a little shallow), some less so like Palm Trees and Power Lines (well-made, but unimaginative) and Flux Gourmet (pretentious and slow)
You Won't Be Alone: 7/10
A very surprising folk-horror, best described as Malick-Meet-Eggers, with a dash of Herzog. Starting with a witch cursing a baby, it follows her growth to adulthood and eventually the realisation that she is a with, as she infiltrates humanity in an attempt to understand it, and reject the destructive teachers of her surrogate mother. Through internal monologues we get a sense of wonder and curiosity, with an occasional critique of the essence of who we are. It's beautiful and occasionally gruesome, and altogether a very unique film.
Emily the Criminal: 7/10
Further proof, if it was ever needed, that Aubrey Plaza is a fine, if not under-rated actress. Here she plays a troubled woman who tries to get a regular job, but is lured into the somewhat grey territory of consume fraud, only to get a taste for more. The realistic world and fast plotting makes for a compelling story, even if the ending isn't wholly satisfying.
Aftersun: 6/10
A slow and gentle character study, functioning as a sort of memory as a woman looks back on what was probably her last holiday with her father, when she was 11 and he was in his early 30s, and perhaps too young to fully accept his responsibility. Most films would reach for the jugular, but instead we see very brief moments of sadness in the father, and moments of yearing for the daughter to become her own person. Subtle hints lead us to assume the worst, but this isn't a film of reveals, but rather one of how we can often miss the signs.
Burning Days: 7/10
It's Turkey's answer to Chinatown. A young lawyer gets a good job in a small Turkish town, only to discover its backwater mentality leads him to water abuse and sinkholes. But very quikly he finds himself involved in a rape case in which he may have played a part in. While investigating the case and trying to piece together his own memories, we uncover a tale a illicit desire and a town on the verge of war amidst a local election. It's an elusive film with a taut, intense climax.
The Beasts: 7/10
Tense French/Spanish drama about a French/Spanish man who moves back to his old Galician hometown to fix up the houses and attract tourists, only to face ire from the local farmers who resent this blow-in, particularly when he convinced many to turn down the sale of the land to a windmill farm. Thus begins a conflict between our hero and one of the nastier farmers, which esclates into gut-churming war. It's a smart film that tries to see both sides, with some great dialogue scenes and a rather horrid third act that instead tells the story from the POV of the hero's wife. Despite one aspect of the story I didn't buy, this was nevertheless an impressive demonstration of the misunderstandings between classes.
The Woodcutter's Story: 6/10
A very strange Finnish film about a small wood-mill community. Mostly following a rather weak father, whose friend grows increasingly jealous of the man he thinks his wife is having an affair with, it's a quirky selection of moments, perhaps building up to a more important story about repressed desires. It's Lynch meets Kauismaki. Fascinating.
Saw plenty of other good films, some solid, like Funny Pages (the ugliest film I've seen in a while), Boy From Heaven (a fascinating world) and Athena (immersive if a little shallow), some less so like Palm Trees and Power Lines (well-made, but unimaginative) and Flux Gourmet (pretentious and slow)
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Piggy 8/10
The twisted love child of Pedro Almodovar, Catherine Breillat, and Gaspar Noe, this Spanish drama starts as a coming-of-age drama before becoming a crime story and finally the Spaniards' version of French extreme horror. Focusing on a victim of bullying who after nearly being killed by her tormentors, witnesses the kidnapping of one of them. But unlike your normal mainstream film that leads the victim to take action, she becomes conflicted on what to do. Things only get more complicated when the kidnapper begins to show affection towards her. Piggy is a film that goes into unexpected directions and impresses you with its narrative structure and twists while also making your skin crawl as the plot descends into total dread.
If torture films really are making a comeback, let's hope they are more plot-driven like this one and less like the ones that were made by the Eli Roths and Darren Lynn Bousmans of the world.
The twisted love child of Pedro Almodovar, Catherine Breillat, and Gaspar Noe, this Spanish drama starts as a coming-of-age drama before becoming a crime story and finally the Spaniards' version of French extreme horror. Focusing on a victim of bullying who after nearly being killed by her tormentors, witnesses the kidnapping of one of them. But unlike your normal mainstream film that leads the victim to take action, she becomes conflicted on what to do. Things only get more complicated when the kidnapper begins to show affection towards her. Piggy is a film that goes into unexpected directions and impresses you with its narrative structure and twists while also making your skin crawl as the plot descends into total dread.
If torture films really are making a comeback, let's hope they are more plot-driven like this one and less like the ones that were made by the Eli Roths and Darren Lynn Bousmans of the world.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Really enjoyed Piggy as well
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Halloween Ends
I believe that reactions to this would be a lot more positive if it was not related to the Halloween series. While it is kind of a mess, it is an interesting one. I actually didn't think that the main plot-line involving the new character Corey (maybe being possessed - it is left ambiguous in what I thought was a smart move) becomes an apprentice of sorts to Michael was that bad. A lot of the movie has a feel almost reminiscent of a David Lynch film (with one shot being a pretty obvious reference to Lost Highway). Despite most of the film being so different, the final fight between Laurie and Michael doesn't disappoint, and I found the end which is about as final a conclusion to the series as possible satisfying. However, some of the film completely defies logic (and not in a good way), with a lot of contradictions to the characterization of most of the main characters in previous films. In addition, while the film has a very solid atmosphere, most of the scares are relatively predicable and the film never generates that much in the way of tension. Overall, I would say it works much better as a standalone art-horror film than as a Halloween film.
I would give it a 7 out of 10 on its own merits - but a 5 as a Halloween film.
I believe that reactions to this would be a lot more positive if it was not related to the Halloween series. While it is kind of a mess, it is an interesting one. I actually didn't think that the main plot-line involving the new character Corey (maybe being possessed - it is left ambiguous in what I thought was a smart move) becomes an apprentice of sorts to Michael was that bad. A lot of the movie has a feel almost reminiscent of a David Lynch film (with one shot being a pretty obvious reference to Lost Highway). Despite most of the film being so different, the final fight between Laurie and Michael doesn't disappoint, and I found the end which is about as final a conclusion to the series as possible satisfying. However, some of the film completely defies logic (and not in a good way), with a lot of contradictions to the characterization of most of the main characters in previous films. In addition, while the film has a very solid atmosphere, most of the scares are relatively predicable and the film never generates that much in the way of tension. Overall, I would say it works much better as a standalone art-horror film than as a Halloween film.
I would give it a 7 out of 10 on its own merits - but a 5 as a Halloween film.
It's not destroying. It's making something new.
Image courtesy of -
https://nerdist.com/annihilation-shimmer-ending-explained/
Image courtesy of -
https://nerdist.com/annihilation-shimmer-ending-explained/
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Speak No Evil 6/10
If not for the climax and ending, I would have given it an 8/10. For the most part, it's a solid European thriller about a family from Denmark becoming close to a Dutch family and as they come to the Netherlands to visit them, the Danish family finds out that the Dutch family aren't what they thought they were. But unfortunately, the build-up leads to an ending that would have made more sense in an American horror film, in which for no reason at all, the bad guys win with really no attempt for the Danish family to fight to save their daughter after a very gratuitous scene where she gets her tongue cut off, hence the film's title. If they had gone with an ending that actually fit the film and wasn't an excuse to be faux-edgy and appeal to the gore crowd, it might have kept that 8/10 score. Instead, it's 4/5 a good film brought down by a bad finale.
If not for the climax and ending, I would have given it an 8/10. For the most part, it's a solid European thriller about a family from Denmark becoming close to a Dutch family and as they come to the Netherlands to visit them, the Danish family finds out that the Dutch family aren't what they thought they were. But unfortunately, the build-up leads to an ending that would have made more sense in an American horror film, in which for no reason at all, the bad guys win with really no attempt for the Danish family to fight to save their daughter after a very gratuitous scene where she gets her tongue cut off, hence the film's title. If they had gone with an ending that actually fit the film and wasn't an excuse to be faux-edgy and appeal to the gore crowd, it might have kept that 8/10 score. Instead, it's 4/5 a good film brought down by a bad finale.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Tar
I feel like this will be an unpopular opinion, but I wasn't a huge fan of this. Cate Blanchett is great, though, (particularly in the last half hour of the film where her image unravels) and the movie is worth seeing for her performance alone. The rest of the cast is great as well, in particular Nina Hoss and Noemie Merlant. My main issue with Tar is the pacing. I feel like much of the film could have been cut out, and it wouldn't have changed much in terms of the overarching story/themes. While it is a very well-made film (in terms of acting, cinematography, etc.), it is a bit overindulgent, and I did not feel like it needed to be as long as it was. Still, if you are interested, I would recommend seeing it for the acting alone.
6 out of 10
I feel like this will be an unpopular opinion, but I wasn't a huge fan of this. Cate Blanchett is great, though, (particularly in the last half hour of the film where her image unravels) and the movie is worth seeing for her performance alone. The rest of the cast is great as well, in particular Nina Hoss and Noemie Merlant. My main issue with Tar is the pacing. I feel like much of the film could have been cut out, and it wouldn't have changed much in terms of the overarching story/themes. While it is a very well-made film (in terms of acting, cinematography, etc.), it is a bit overindulgent, and I did not feel like it needed to be as long as it was. Still, if you are interested, I would recommend seeing it for the acting alone.
6 out of 10
It's not destroying. It's making something new.
Image courtesy of -
https://nerdist.com/annihilation-shimmer-ending-explained/
Image courtesy of -
https://nerdist.com/annihilation-shimmer-ending-explained/
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Tár 9/10
Todd Field is back. After sixteen years away from the screen, his return to directing is everything we were expecting and then some. While most Hollywood films lately are about making the rich and powerful sympathetic and figures to worship, Field tears down those cliches by creating a character that gradually becomes more and more detestable as the film goes on and we relish in her downfall from respected conductor to doing shows for furries. Cate Blanchett's performance as the titular character is one of her best and those she probably deserves the Oscar, she sadly won't get it as there is usually an aversion from voters for villain protagonists. She commands the film as the character gradually falls in respectability and in sanity and gives us one of the most memorable characters she's ever played. In fact, the whole cast is solid as Field does what he does best with his casts: he lets them act. Field doesn't go for spectacle or quick cuts. He makes the actors the spectacle.
Though some may be turned off by the long length, it packs a lot into its 158 minutes and no one of those minutes feels empty. This is what a modern movie for adults that tackles real-life situations should be. And I'm glad that there are still some filmmakers that are willing to show reality that these same conglomerates want to hide. Welcome back, Todd.
Todd Field is back. After sixteen years away from the screen, his return to directing is everything we were expecting and then some. While most Hollywood films lately are about making the rich and powerful sympathetic and figures to worship, Field tears down those cliches by creating a character that gradually becomes more and more detestable as the film goes on and we relish in her downfall from respected conductor to doing shows for furries. Cate Blanchett's performance as the titular character is one of her best and those she probably deserves the Oscar, she sadly won't get it as there is usually an aversion from voters for villain protagonists. She commands the film as the character gradually falls in respectability and in sanity and gives us one of the most memorable characters she's ever played. In fact, the whole cast is solid as Field does what he does best with his casts: he lets them act. Field doesn't go for spectacle or quick cuts. He makes the actors the spectacle.
Though some may be turned off by the long length, it packs a lot into its 158 minutes and no one of those minutes feels empty. This is what a modern movie for adults that tackles real-life situations should be. And I'm glad that there are still some filmmakers that are willing to show reality that these same conglomerates want to hide. Welcome back, Todd.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Till 9/10
Chinonye Chukwu's second film surpasses her first in nearly every way, with solid production design, beautiful cinematography, and one of the year's best casts. Danielle Deadwyler is a find as Mamie Till, who became an important activist for the Civil Rights movement after the lynching of her son. She carries the film and gives a performance that while sometimes showy, is a potential star-making role that is head and shoulders above most performances typically promoted for Oscars. The film is not afraid to show the truth of the 1950's Deep South and the way that the state of Mississippi handled Emmett's murder really shows you how little things have changed in terms of handling the brutal and unnecessary deaths of innocent people. But it's also a hopeful film, as Mamie Till's fight for justice and truth is an inspiration, one that shows hate can't stand forever.
The A+ Cinemascore is no surprise. This is a very solid drama on the level of Selma and deserves a bigger audience than its box office take so far.
Chinonye Chukwu's second film surpasses her first in nearly every way, with solid production design, beautiful cinematography, and one of the year's best casts. Danielle Deadwyler is a find as Mamie Till, who became an important activist for the Civil Rights movement after the lynching of her son. She carries the film and gives a performance that while sometimes showy, is a potential star-making role that is head and shoulders above most performances typically promoted for Oscars. The film is not afraid to show the truth of the 1950's Deep South and the way that the state of Mississippi handled Emmett's murder really shows you how little things have changed in terms of handling the brutal and unnecessary deaths of innocent people. But it's also a hopeful film, as Mamie Till's fight for justice and truth is an inspiration, one that shows hate can't stand forever.
The A+ Cinemascore is no surprise. This is a very solid drama on the level of Selma and deserves a bigger audience than its box office take so far.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
The Banshees of Inisherin 4/10
I'm beginning to wonder if Martin McDonagh has anything to say nowadays. This one-joke premise where a friendship falls apart for very vague reasons is pretty much a sitcom stretched out for nearly two hours and it's made jarring by the decision to set it during the Irish Civil War even though basically every character talks like someone in modern day. The film certainly would have been much shorter if Colin Farrell's character wasn't so thick-headed. Brendan Gleeson and Kerry Condon probably get awards notice for elevating their thinly-written characters but Farrell and Barry Keoghan's characters are tedious and annoying. I gave the film a 4 for the donkey and sheepdog.
If not for it being from an Oscar winner and the dearth of comedies getting theatrical releases in present times, I don't think this would be getting the acclaim that it's getting. It's a forgettable film from a director whose best work came long ago.
I'm beginning to wonder if Martin McDonagh has anything to say nowadays. This one-joke premise where a friendship falls apart for very vague reasons is pretty much a sitcom stretched out for nearly two hours and it's made jarring by the decision to set it during the Irish Civil War even though basically every character talks like someone in modern day. The film certainly would have been much shorter if Colin Farrell's character wasn't so thick-headed. Brendan Gleeson and Kerry Condon probably get awards notice for elevating their thinly-written characters but Farrell and Barry Keoghan's characters are tedious and annoying. I gave the film a 4 for the donkey and sheepdog.
If not for it being from an Oscar winner and the dearth of comedies getting theatrical releases in present times, I don't think this would be getting the acclaim that it's getting. It's a forgettable film from a director whose best work came long ago.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Orphan: First Kill 2/10
This might be the most unnecessary prequel produced by a major studio in recent memory. Feeling more like a gimmick (actor reprises a role she performed thirteen years earlier but playing her actual age this time) than an actual movie, this cash-grab that somehow grossed a decent amount in limited release consists of an awful script, lazy direction, the year's worst cinematography where the color palette is the same as Spinal Tap's Smell the Glove album cover, and a cast way below the previous film with a slumming Julia Stiles and Kiefer Sutherland's half-brother being no match for Vera Farmiga and Peter Sarsgaard. And if you thought the first film's twist was bad, this one has perhaps one of the lamest and most out of left field twists for any horror film, which also forces you to take sides on which hatable character you want to live. There is only one likable character in the entire film and she's out of the picture after the first ten minutes.
But unfortunately, we'll probably be getting a third film at some point that looks further back at Esther's reign of terror. Remind me to avoid it like the plague.
As to anyone wondering why I watched this, there were a couple of reasons. One, I liked the original. And second, I figured that I had to give it a chance as there was a vocal number of people that wanted it and I had to wonder if they were right to demand it. They were wrong.
This might be the most unnecessary prequel produced by a major studio in recent memory. Feeling more like a gimmick (actor reprises a role she performed thirteen years earlier but playing her actual age this time) than an actual movie, this cash-grab that somehow grossed a decent amount in limited release consists of an awful script, lazy direction, the year's worst cinematography where the color palette is the same as Spinal Tap's Smell the Glove album cover, and a cast way below the previous film with a slumming Julia Stiles and Kiefer Sutherland's half-brother being no match for Vera Farmiga and Peter Sarsgaard. And if you thought the first film's twist was bad, this one has perhaps one of the lamest and most out of left field twists for any horror film, which also forces you to take sides on which hatable character you want to live. There is only one likable character in the entire film and she's out of the picture after the first ten minutes.
But unfortunately, we'll probably be getting a third film at some point that looks further back at Esther's reign of terror. Remind me to avoid it like the plague.
As to anyone wondering why I watched this, there were a couple of reasons. One, I liked the original. And second, I figured that I had to give it a chance as there was a vocal number of people that wanted it and I had to wonder if they were right to demand it. They were wrong.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Confess, Fletch 3/10
Yet another franchise that shouldn't have been rebooted. What was previously adapted as a pair of fun comedies with Chevy Chase as a master of disguise in the 80's is turned into a dull mystery with a miscast Jon Hamm as the the befuddled private investigator that feels more like a pilot to a cable series than a new chapter for the pulp franchise. Modernizing the story from the 70's into present day takes away a lot of why Fletch was Fletch and weirdly turns him into a Parker type dropped into an episode of Brooklyn Nine Nine. The story seems to be close to the source material but maybe this wasn't the right story to bring Fletch to a new audience. It feels like a pale imitation of the previous Fletch films and is less the Michael Ritchie films and more a dated Judd Apatow film. Also, Jon Hamm is a better villain actor than he is a lovable rogue. The film might have worked better had it been filmed with Jason Lee back in the 2000's as originally planned (yes, Kevin Smith was going to direct that version but you can't win them all).
Long short story, stick to the 1985 Fletch and ignore this one.
Yet another franchise that shouldn't have been rebooted. What was previously adapted as a pair of fun comedies with Chevy Chase as a master of disguise in the 80's is turned into a dull mystery with a miscast Jon Hamm as the the befuddled private investigator that feels more like a pilot to a cable series than a new chapter for the pulp franchise. Modernizing the story from the 70's into present day takes away a lot of why Fletch was Fletch and weirdly turns him into a Parker type dropped into an episode of Brooklyn Nine Nine. The story seems to be close to the source material but maybe this wasn't the right story to bring Fletch to a new audience. It feels like a pale imitation of the previous Fletch films and is less the Michael Ritchie films and more a dated Judd Apatow film. Also, Jon Hamm is a better villain actor than he is a lovable rogue. The film might have worked better had it been filmed with Jason Lee back in the 2000's as originally planned (yes, Kevin Smith was going to direct that version but you can't win them all).
Long short story, stick to the 1985 Fletch and ignore this one.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever 4/10
Without the talents of Chadwick Boseman, the sequel to the 2018 film suffers from being way too long and way too serious for its own good. Even though the film starts well enough, with T'Challa's funeral and perhaps the first time that a studio logo has served as a dedication, it declines fast as we get a film that is unable to determine if it wants to be a film about a war over mineral rights, a remake of the first Black Panther (the chase sequence in Cambridge is a hollow imitation of the first's chase through Busan), or a less campy version of Aquaman but this time, Aquaman's the villain. We are left with a film that doesn't do much in its first two hours and then when Shuri becomes the new Black Panther, an event that should have happened much sooner, it tries to cram 90 minutes into 45.
In the end, we end up with a massively disappointing film considering the capable cast and crew involved. Marvel turns its most promising franchise into just another bland Marvel movie that will make money before being forgotten when the next one arrives.
Without the talents of Chadwick Boseman, the sequel to the 2018 film suffers from being way too long and way too serious for its own good. Even though the film starts well enough, with T'Challa's funeral and perhaps the first time that a studio logo has served as a dedication, it declines fast as we get a film that is unable to determine if it wants to be a film about a war over mineral rights, a remake of the first Black Panther (the chase sequence in Cambridge is a hollow imitation of the first's chase through Busan), or a less campy version of Aquaman but this time, Aquaman's the villain. We are left with a film that doesn't do much in its first two hours and then when Shuri becomes the new Black Panther, an event that should have happened much sooner, it tries to cram 90 minutes into 45.
In the end, we end up with a massively disappointing film considering the capable cast and crew involved. Marvel turns its most promising franchise into just another bland Marvel movie that will make money before being forgotten when the next one arrives.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Decision to Leave 9/10
Park Chan-wook's first film in six years is a thoroughly entertaining murder mystery that recalls the best of Hitchcock. The film, while very stylish, is also filled with plenty of substance and a story that goes in many directions that you wouldn't expect. While not quite on the level of Parasite, it might be close to being the best film to come out of South Korea since that film and should have had a similar amount of success. It's better than most American thrillers and doesn't cheap out when confronted with depicting the human reaction of conflict or loss.
Before this gets a mediocre remake that probably stars Ryan Reynolds and Aubrey Plaza, find a way to see this one. It's definitely one of Park's finest hours (or two hours and eighteen minutes, in this case) as a director.
Park Chan-wook's first film in six years is a thoroughly entertaining murder mystery that recalls the best of Hitchcock. The film, while very stylish, is also filled with plenty of substance and a story that goes in many directions that you wouldn't expect. While not quite on the level of Parasite, it might be close to being the best film to come out of South Korea since that film and should have had a similar amount of success. It's better than most American thrillers and doesn't cheap out when confronted with depicting the human reaction of conflict or loss.
Before this gets a mediocre remake that probably stars Ryan Reynolds and Aubrey Plaza, find a way to see this one. It's definitely one of Park's finest hours (or two hours and eighteen minutes, in this case) as a director.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.
Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep
Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio 9/10
Not to be confused with Robert Zemeckis's live-action remake of the 1940 Disney Pinocchio, Guillermo del Toro and Mark Gustafson's version of the story transports the action to the era of Mussolini, creating perhaps the darkest film adaptation of the work, featuring death, war, fascist dictatorships, and a cricket suffering from various mishaps as he tries to drive the little puppet to being good. But it's also one of the best adaptations of Pinocchio, with incredible animation, a narrative that reminds one of classic Disney, and an end result that entertains adults as well as children. This absolutely deserves its Oscar buzz and not only will it likely win del Toro a second Academy Award but could be a sleeper Best Picture nominee (it would certain be more deserving than half of what Gold Derby favors).
It won't be in theatres for much longer before Netflix but I'm happy that Regal decided to have this fill screens this weekend. It might be the best film to open this month.
Not to be confused with Robert Zemeckis's live-action remake of the 1940 Disney Pinocchio, Guillermo del Toro and Mark Gustafson's version of the story transports the action to the era of Mussolini, creating perhaps the darkest film adaptation of the work, featuring death, war, fascist dictatorships, and a cricket suffering from various mishaps as he tries to drive the little puppet to being good. But it's also one of the best adaptations of Pinocchio, with incredible animation, a narrative that reminds one of classic Disney, and an end result that entertains adults as well as children. This absolutely deserves its Oscar buzz and not only will it likely win del Toro a second Academy Award but could be a sleeper Best Picture nominee (it would certain be more deserving than half of what Gold Derby favors).
It won't be in theatres for much longer before Netflix but I'm happy that Regal decided to have this fill screens this weekend. It might be the best film to open this month.
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.