|
Post by Jay on Sept 26, 2021 19:00:45 GMT -8
Izzy Gets the F*ck Across Town (2018)
X months after posting the Carrie Coons and Mackenzie Davis cover of Heavens to Betsy's "Axemen," and X+Y months after first becoming aware of the movie, I finally watched Izzy tonight, mostly because I had been uncharacteristically signed into my YouTube account earlier in the week and it suggested the song to me again. I recognized coming in that it had gotten around 60% on both RT and IMDB, and that's generally the spot that's a death sentence for any movie. Very rarely does anything decent land there. Yet I was surprised as I was watching it that it takes the guise of the rom-com and all of the attendant conversations about "serendipity" and "this was meant to be" and tweaks them repeatedly. Weirdly, aspects of it reminded me more of Run Lola Run far more than romantic comedy, but then I guess that's not terribly surprising given that both involve girls with bobbed hair making their way across town and against odds. Both are also somewhat episodic in structure, with Lola getting her multiple chances and Izzy's narrative being broken up by various interactions-as-set-pieces with other people around town including Alia Shawkat and Annie Potts. Both play with the free will vs. determinism bit, and whether one or more of the millions of choices we make daily actually affects things or if that's just wishful thinking. I don't know that I would say, even as a fan of MD, that it's an excellent movie, but it does straddle an interesting line between being a period piece, with so many elements contingent on social media technology, and being something timeless for its attempts to ask, "okay, what happens next?" I'd also suggest that the actors help lift what is a good, but not great script, as the scene where they play "Axemen" is full of intensity beyond what you'd anticipate from merely covering a riot girl anthem. Izzy is at least a B, definitely not the D or worse the aggregators seem to give it.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 10, 2021 6:20:43 GMT -8
Folks, when the choices for a late Saturday night movie are Venom: Let There Be Carnage (97 minutes) and No Time to Die (163 minutes), the choice pretty much makes itself.
Venom 2 is, by most objective measures, a bad movie - the story is scattershot, the exposition is rushed and hazy, the characters are one-note, and don't even get me started on the tonal inconsistencies. But... it makes for a pretty good time.
I think I slightly prefer this over the first Venom, which devoted too much time and energy to drama and atmosphere (which it consistently undercut with lazy comedy). The sequel more wholeheartedly embraces the crazy, morphing into something of a buddy/romantic comedy between Eddie and his symbiote. Those are the scenes where the film really shines. Less interesting are the villains, with Woody Harrelson largely wasted as Carnage. The character is particularly hampered by the MPAA - comic-book Carnage is an R-rated villain of the first order, but the PG-13 rating leaves him rather neutered.
A very dumb film, but it's my kind of dumb.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Oct 10, 2021 14:37:38 GMT -8
Jeremy had no time for No Time To Die.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Oct 14, 2021 6:44:55 GMT -8
So, Many Saints of Newark is interesting, in that it pulls a lot of the same tricks that The Sopranos does, but they don't work nearly as well in a film as they do in live action. El Camino and Deadwood: The Movie were both pretty good, but this was a disappointment.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Oct 14, 2021 17:09:55 GMT -8
That's because a two-hour movie generally has more driving action and plot, whereas The Sopranos TV series was always more about character psychology and atmosphere, with minimal plot development in an average episode. And the presence of Livia and Junior in the series already explained the psychological hang-ups of Tony better than any origin story could (not that the film's really about Tony that much anyways). The actors are pretty decent in the film (Farmiga in particular), but it's certainly minor and inessential, and more fan-servicey than the series ever was. Though I'm sure HBO wants Chase to make more of these (apparently a lot of people streamed it on HBO Max), they should really be careful to not risk damaging the legacy of the series by overdoing it.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 14, 2021 18:37:41 GMT -8
Also an important distinction that El Camino and Deadwood: The Movie were sequels (directly furthering character and story from their respective TV shows) while Many Saints is a prequel, and thus naturally limited in plot and character flexibility.
I didn't hate the film, but it never engaged the way the best (or even the average) Sopranos episodes did. The traditional mob storyline was undermined by a lot of the fanservice, and despite some good casting and cinematography, the movie never really justified its existence beyond the need to be a Sopranos brand extension.
I've heard the theory that David Chase initially did not intend to make a Sopranos film - he wanted to make an independent period piece about mobsters and race/class war in the late '60s, but the studio insisted the story have a Sopranos connection. Not sure if this is true, but it would explain why the Dickie and Young Tony halves never cohere into a satisfying whole.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 18, 2021 19:17:08 GMT -8
Looking forward to some exciting films during Oscar season. But in the meantime I'm watching nonsense like...
The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run - I spent much of this film trying to figure out why the villain's voice sounded so familiar. Then the credits told me it was Matt Berry, AKA Laszlo from WWDITS. Probably didn't recognize him due to the dearth of F-bombs. Anyway, as someone who loved the first SpongeBob movie and was generally cool with the second, Sponge on the Run was a forgettable, disposable flick lacking much of the charm of SB's glory days. The plot and structure are heavily derivative of the first movie, with lower stakes and fewer laughs, and the creative CG animation can only go so far. Completely lost me in the third act when it turns into a commercial for the Kamp Koral spinoff.
Infinite - In ten years or so, this movie is going to be discovered by a small faction of sci-fi fans and become into a cult classic. Until that day comes, let it be said that Infinite is B-A-D bad. Despite the talent attached (Mark Wahlberg and Chiwetel Ejiofor in front of the camera, Antoine Fuqua behind it), this is a colossal mess of a movie, with an incoherent script, underdeveloped characters, and endless speechifying dialogue. Part of me wants to file it under the "so bad it's good" label (Wahlberg's detached performance at times approaches "What?? Noooo!" levels of silliness), but apart from a few unintentional laughs, most of it is simply dull. Good to see Jason Mantzoukas, though.
Me You Madness - I was actually hoping to enjoy this movie, since I think a lot of the flak Louise Linton gets is over-the-top. (Big surprise, it's the Internet.) But holy cow, this one is a disaster. Linton writes, directs, and stars in this totally clueless attempt at a thriller/comedy film that riffs on films like American Psycho in an attempt to provide sly commentary on wealth and materialism. Packed to overflowing with lazy fourth-wall breaks, pointless wardrobe changes, and hackneyed '80s needle drops, this film is a fascinating example of how it is possible to create a film that is completely self-aware and yet completely lacking in self-awareness.
Anyway, I can recommend none of these. Off to find some good titles; wish me luck next time.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Oct 19, 2021 3:34:08 GMT -8
Finally watched the second and third John Wick flicks in the past few days. The plots are, of course, just an excuse to set up extended fight/shoot-out sequences, but many of those set-pieces are undeniably creatively-choreographed and staged, and the supporting cast is solid. There's a viciousness to these films, but they still have a good deal of deadpan humour to keep them from becoming too much of a drag. And while Keanu Reeves will never be considered a great actor, he's good in these sorts of roles, and has always been genuinely likeable despite his limitations. I think three films would've been enough, given how thin the actual material is on a story level, but we'll see if the franchise has any bullets left in its chamber whenever the fourth installment is released.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 19, 2021 9:35:33 GMT -8
I get a sense of diminishing returns from the John Wick films. I liked the first one a lot, but 2 and 3 start going through the motions after a while, as undeniably well-crafted as they are in terms of staging and action. And as you say, not much of a story to sustain the series on a plot/character level. With a fourth and presumed fifth film on the way (not to mention a prequel TV series), I'm skeptical they can keep this up. Guess we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Oct 19, 2021 17:09:19 GMT -8
I delayed watching the John Wick sequels because I really wasn't all that taken with the first one, but I think (much like the critics) I actually enjoyed the sequels more than the original. But I still think they're pushing it with four or five installments. Three would've been fine, though. The third one had a real immediacy to it, given how, you know, EVERY ASSASSIN ON EARTH was out to get him. Heh.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Oct 21, 2021 15:28:08 GMT -8
Venom 2 is, by most objective measures, a bad movie - the story is scattershot, the exposition is rushed and hazy, the characters are one-note, and don't even get me started on the tonal inconsistencies. But... it makes for a pretty good time. The only thing I really know about the new Venom is that the credits feature this absolute pearl from Wu-affliates Czarface: Well I'm real, the author with the best to offer, step out of the flying saucer reciting Geoffrey ChaucerWe've been running it this past week at work and I welcome catching it as folks hesitantly file out, presumably in expectation of a post-credits sequence. I'd argue this behaviour is now so ubiquitous that superhero movies have got something to answer for if people are hoping for Easter Eggs at the end of a documentary about Mobutu Sese Seko.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 21, 2021 18:18:42 GMT -8
I actually left the theater before that credits reached that song. (There was a different musical number during the early credits, but it wasn't nearly as memorable as Eminem's "VINNOM, VINNOM, GETTEM" or whatever nonsense my ears were bombarded with in October 2018.) I had read in advance that there was only one mid-credits scene in Let There Be Carnage*, so I didn't bother sticking around once it was over.
I enjoy post-credits scenes in film, and have for years before Marvel seemingly made them a prerequisite, although as someone who grew up on videos and DVDs, I do sometimes wish that theaters would come with a fast-forward option.
*It appears to be the only scene in the movie that people are talking about. That... doesn't speak well for the film, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Oct 22, 2021 2:53:52 GMT -8
The first Venom is actually on TV here this week, and though I'm a lot more partial to Ruben Fleischer as a music video director than a feature filmmaker, I'm tempted to watch it seeing as it's October. I mean, you can claim it's not a horror movie, but divorce it of all context and it's about a geezer sporadically turning into a giant space monster.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 22, 2021 12:51:25 GMT -8
I think Sony is in fact aiming for something of a horror vibe with their Marvel films (the upcoming Morbius is another example) - maybe drawing some inspiration from the Marvel Horror comics line of the '70s. (B&W magazines, less censorship than mainstream comics - it was a wild time, folks.) They can't be the MCU, but maybe they can carve out a niche as the MCU's rebellious, chain-smoking second cousin.
|
|
|
Post by Jay on Oct 25, 2021 14:02:22 GMT -8
The People Under the Stairs (1991) It says a bit, perhaps too much, that for some time in preparing this post, I remembered that I had seen five movies but was unable to remember the first of the bunch. Wes Craven was attempting here to capitalize on a 90s interest in a certain kind of urban life (see also: Candyman, Tales from the Hood), but in its initial running it falters due to his brass ear for dialogue. As the Twin Peaks guy, it seems too easy for me to say that he better handles Everett McGill (Big Ed!) and Wendy Robie (Nadine!) as a parody of a certain 80s conservatism that outwardly preaches values, whereas the only true value to them is in the almighty dollar. There's some fun with them as Robie plays her part with expected cunning, but Big Ed as an irascible, excitable guy who occasionally wears a leather gimp suit is also selling point. Thematically, there's material there, concerning gentrification writ large, but it does less with the title's premise (they're kidnappers too!) than you might expect and the resolution to the drama would strike the contemporary audience as far too simplistic, providing symptomatic rather than systemic solutions.
Videodrome (1983) For a film centered on torture porn as a premise and starring Debbie Harry at the peak of her powers, albeit as a brunette this time, Videodrome manages to be surprisingly boring through its first half hour. Once it settles into what is more Cronenberg's wheelhouse of body horror and oddly pulsating, veined bits of technology, then it becomes more watchable, even as we're still stuck on VHS tapes as the delivery system. Technological limitations aside, this is of a piece with all kinds of sci-fi / horror hybrids like, movies I will regret to mention, FeardotCom and The Lawnmower Man, which I have seen, and Unfriended, which I pointedly did not. As tech advances, the horror movie plays the conservative part to ask when and where science may go too far. That on its own would be little to recommend the film, but there's an ideological undercurrent to Videodrome which aligns it with They Live! and other movies of the era, in that one of the groups responding to the existence of Videodrome is a military contractor innocuously fronted as an eyeglass company. There is also talk, both for and against, weaponizing Videodrome as either rooting out society's depravity or toughening it up to face the real horrors coming from abroad. However, it's hard to say if that isn't just ultimately a vehicle for gross outs and violence, as has often been levied against the director's work, and the ambiguity as to how much Videodrome is already affecting the world seems to be a secondary consideration. Long live the new flesh?
Prince of Darkness (1987) I'd heard lines from this referenced in DJ Shadow's Endtroducing for years and knew it as a component to Carpenter's Apocalypse Trilogy, so it seemed time enough to get a view of it while it was available as part of Edgar Wright's Halloween curation on Peacock (ditto the above AND below). The premise basically is, "what if Satan / evil was not an entity so much as a substance?" which could be buffed out to "what if Satan was quantum physics?" If you're wondering where that secondary premise goes, it doesn't. Some aspiring scientist screenwriter is no doubt at work on a robust treatment of the question, if the answer isn't 1997's Event Horizon, or worse, Prometheus. For the rest of us waiting, Satan is basically a lava lamp. Its seal is breaking and it sometimes squirts passers-by with Ecto Cooler, and then they do Satan's bidding. There's also time travel I guess and alternate dimensions and Alice Cooper impaling a nerd with a bicycle and Donald Pleasance as a priest declaring stuff in a spooky if spiritually defeated way. Debatably, it may also be about the AIDS crisis if you read one particular character as gay, who is not, incidentally, the character with the commanding mustache and the top button of his polo left undone. For me, the most compelling portion of the movie was seeing how the various possessed individuals RESPONDED to being possessed, through which one might get into their various psyches, similar to Evil Dead, but perhaps more rewarding in its results. I'm not sure that this recommends the movie on its own though.
The Sentinel (1977) As a film that inspired Prince of Darkness, I felt like I wanted to explore it. Plus, the cast, I mean, Burgess Meredith (who throws a birthday party for his tuxedo cat at one point!), Beverly D'Angelo's first screen role, Ava Gardner, Jeff Goldblum cosplaying Adam Scott, Susan Sarandon's ex-husband as the love interest, John Carradine.... Surely, something had to be there. What I would describe it as, however, is a bit derivative, basically Rosemary's Baby with more ambiguity and minus the sort of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining's sense of inevitability. Truly, there wasn't much surprise in the outcome of the predecessor, but this one is better plotted if unevenly acted and there are deviations that are surprising for the era. That said, can't say that it aged well. One recurring theme is that all lesbians know is fornicate, murder, worship Satan, eat hot chip, and LIE. This seems to reflect more on the author than anything in reality (and apparently the author of the book was deeply unsatisfied with the direction of this one, go figure). The other is that it's kind of hard coming out of it to say there's a rooting interest in much of anything. We still don't know what a hellgate was doing in Brooklyn Heights. The Catholic Church has succeeded in shutting it down, but the resolution doesn't allow for much agency. A third, quirky part, is that the demons, once they appear, were in fact individuals with deformities and genetic issues who were cast en masse for the role. The film demonstrates in other parts that being pretty doesn't mean you're good or evil, but showing these individuals as examples for evil sits uncomfortably.
It Follows (2014) In the opening scene, a girl fleeing the sexually-transmitted entity is seen entering and fleeing a house numbered "1492." Wasn't that the year Columbus discovered syphilis? Anyway, for a low kill count and not much of the traditional horror effects beyond ambient dread, I think It Follows was probably worth the interest it stirred up hereabouts back in the day. I would also venture that the premise of having the sexy / not-sexy entity follow individuals around, taking the form of whichever randos from their life it might utilize to get closest, allows for all kinds of interpretations that Freudians would have a field day with were that still a dominant mode of artistic criticism, which it isn't so much these days. Apparently folks pointed to the climax as a lapse of screenwriting in that it was a Scooby-Doo level trap for something that definitely was not an old man in a cheap mask from Spirit Halloween Store, but I didn't mind it so much and thought that the exceptionalism of the teenaged mindset made it work overall. The only weird spot for me was the car crash, which made it hard for me to believe that the Entity wouldn't catch up while the others were racing on foot to get our lead-but-not-final girl to the hospital. Otherwise, it was literary enough (Prufrock!), atmospheric enough (nice touches on the ambiguity of era and of one of the hideouts from the monster), and acted well-enough to hit all of its major points. I guess the only weird thing for me was that Disasterpeace scored it and it had the effect of making me want to go back and play Hyper Light Drifter.
|
|