|
Post by Jeremy on Mar 20, 2022 19:57:44 GMT -8
What's interesting is that the directors of the new Scream have already built their reputations with tongue-in-cheek horror, having previously directed the dark and satirical Ready or Not (which was quite good). If the franchise is to continue with a new cast (and - judging by the surviving characters and already-greenlit sequel - it will), it should do well enough with those guys at the helm.
As for the films themselves, I'd rank them 1>2>5>4>3. Never saw the TV series, and had in fact completely forgotten there was a TV series until I glanced at Wiki.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Mar 20, 2022 20:43:42 GMT -8
That's about the order I'd put them in, too, but I might flip-flop on 2 and 5.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 9, 2022 14:09:18 GMT -8
Everything Everywhere All at Once is ridiculously entertaining. It somehow manages to be laugh-out-loud funny at regular intervals without sacrificing the rather heavy emotional stakes at the center of it. Though the film primarily takes place in a few locations (most notably an IRS office and laundromat), there are so many little pieces edited in from different settings that it's remarkable that they were able to keep the budget under control ($25 million, apparently). The editing and camerawork is quite remarkable at times, and the cast is terrific. The film has echoes of the work of Charlie Kaufman, Michel Gondry, and Jackie Chan, the skill-learning elements of The Matrix, and a bit of the glamour of a Wong Kar Wai film. It probably leans a bit too heavily into convoluted plot exposition in the early going, but that eases off by the second act, and it's full-steam ahead once the "hero" and "villain" first face off. It'll probably be a bit too overwhelming for some folks, but I was consistently delighted by it. It's a shame that so many people will be seeing that Sonic 2 sequel this weekend when something this imaginative, unique and engaging is being offered up in (relatively) wide release. They don't know what they're missing. There's no way that upcoming high-profile Multiverse movie will be better than this. And Michelle Yeoh rules: give her every damn award for holding this all together.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 10, 2022 17:33:33 GMT -8
Of the many things that Everything Everywhere All At Once does well, it's most impressive in its tonal balance. It is a ridiculously silly film, yet the off-the-wall plot and wackadoodle effects are convincingly built around a genuinely heartfelt core. And the cast - from Ke Huy Quan to James Hong to Jamie Lee Curtis - is uniformly excellent. Michelle Yeoh delivers one of the best performances in recent memory; it's rare that any film manages to utilize her myriad talents, but this one gives her an abundance to work with as both an actress and martial artist.
It's one of the wildest and most distinct filmgoing experiences I've had in a long while, and I expect I'll need some time to process the film. It's incredibly entertaining, but there's a lot to absorb, both visually and thematically, and I can definitely see why some viewers would be turned off/annoyed by the excess. And hey, if the filmmakers wanted it to be as successful as The Jim Carrey Show Guest-Starring a Blue Furball Part 2, they would have given it a PG rating and included cameos from Tobey and Andrew. But they didn't, and EEAAO is probably all the better for it.
One small complaint: If you're going to include an IRS audit in your multiverse fantasy sci-fi escapist comedy, maybe don't release it so close to the end of the US tax season?
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 10, 2022 19:40:40 GMT -8
The film did an excellent job at conveying how characters need to focus all their attention on -- or come into contact with -- very specific items in order to access the skills of their other selves, which is a rather absurd conceit in principle. So when those pointy items appeared in the office, I IMMEDIATELY knew where they were headed, and laughed my ass off at the whole sequence.
It's a real shame I only saw the film -- on opening weekend! -- in a theater with three other people in attendance, because this is the sort of film that would probably play exceptionally well to a large crowd, were they to give it the time-of-day.
Oh, Jeremy, if you haven't already seen it, you might want to check out the directors' earlier film, Swiss Army Man. It's not as artistically successful as this picture, but it's similarly bizarre. Hopefully EEAaO's limited box-office appeal won't deter Hollywood from giving these guys more opportunities with moderate production budgets. They're definitely doing unique work.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 10, 2022 20:34:40 GMT -8
Yeah, the multiple Chekhov's Guns in the film paid off spectacularly. There was a point when I started to question whether some of the "props" (e.g. the googly eyes) had been properly integrated into the plot before they came into play for the grand emotional payoff, but in the end I just got too sucked into the absurdity to care. This was also the first R-rated film I've seen in a theater in quite some time (the last one was 1917), so perhaps I got an extra shock from a couple of the film's unholy visual elements (though those were thankfully limited).
My theater had about two dozen people in it, and there were a lot of laughs throughout. People seemed to be having a good time. (Although there was one guy sitting in front of me who pulled out his phone when the movie started and would not shut it off for ten minutes. I think I was legally within my rights to punch him in the nose, but instead just moved to a different seat.) It's made about $6 million domestic in its opening weekend, which is no small feat for an A24 indie, though it of course won't do anywhere near as well as the standard blockbuster tentpoles, despite the positive word of mouth.
I have not seen Swiss Army Man, though I do know its basic (and weird yet immature) conceit. Will probably check it out soon. I've had a few weeks of relatively low film consumption, but will be picking up the pace again shortly.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 10, 2022 22:08:36 GMT -8
Heh. In British Columbia, the film is only rated PG (no age restrictions, but unsuitable for some audiences). It's 14A in Alberta (people under 14 must be accompanied by an adult). To put things into perspective, years ago, Jackie Brown, which has a ridiculous amount of profanity but not much violence, was rated 14A in BC. I think Kill Bill Vol. 2 was only 14A as well (Vol. 1 was 18A). Canadian ratings boards are a lot more lenient w/r/t to sexual content and profanity (and violence, to an extent) than the U.S. That said, when you mentioned the film was rated R in the States, I had to remind myself that some sex toys show up onscreen on a few occasions (LOL). It's done in such an over-the-top, slapsticky manner, though, that I think the Canadian board got it more right than the US one. 14A is, at the very least, pretty reasonable to me. I suppose PG might be pushing it a bit, but parents should know to read the details of a film before letting their kids see it unattended.
People having their phones out during movies is a lot bigger problem in the States, based on my experience. Part of that's just down to population size, but it's probably true that the average Canadian is a bit more courteous than your average American.
Swiss Army Man might gross you out a bit (there's a fair amount of toilet-humour in it), but it's bizarrely intriguing. I think it was also the last time I saw Paul Dano in a film prior to The Batman (I did watch a film he directed called Wildlife in the interim, though). (ETA: Oops, I may have seen him in Okja -- from the director of Parasite -- the year after Swiss Army Man.) He also gave a fine performance as a young Brian Wilson in Love and Mercy.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 11, 2022 7:55:05 GMT -8
As far as R-rated* films go, EEAaO is relatively tame (the F-bombs are minimal, the violence is over-the-top but not overly bloody, and the sex humor is reserved for a few choice scenes). I have definitely seen worse. That said, I was a little surprised to see some kids in the audience at my screening (even though they were accompanied by parents). Despite the lack of excessive content, it does seem like the kind of film that could seriously mess up a young and impressionable mind. (Or, to be fair, even an old and unimpressionable one.)
In any event, I'm not quite sure how to pitch it to the uninitiated. The closest I can think of is "Imagine if Charlie Kaufman directed a feature-length Rick and Morty that included touches of Inception and The Matrix, combined with family drama and martial-arts action." But even that feels like it doesn't quite get to the heart of the film's madcap energy.
*The MPAA's restrictions are, unsurprisingly, a little inconsistent. The rule that PG-13 films are allotted only one F-word (that must be used in a non-sexual context) usually holds true, but there are ways to appeal for leniency. The Martian and The Hate U Give both got away with two F-bombs, and Green Book actually managed to use three (though one was in Italian). Additionally, studios will occasionally release edited versions of films in tandem with more adult versions to capitalize on popularity - The King's Speech was rereleased in PG-13 form (with its one profanity-laced scene heavily edited) after it won the Oscar.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Apr 11, 2022 9:40:57 GMT -8
Let me tell you, I'm pretty mad that this movie is not showing in my local theater (to make room for the Sing 2 Singalong! VOMIT EMOJI) ... because it sounds pretty damn awesome.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 11, 2022 11:00:46 GMT -8
Let me tell you, I'm pretty mad that this movie is not showing in my local theater (to make room for the Sing 2 Singalong! VOMIT EMOJI) ... because it sounds pretty damn awesome. Yeah, that's too bad, because I think you'd probably really enjoy it. I mean, the core of the story is actually a mother-daughter relationship, which isn't typical for a wild sci-fi dramedy.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 11, 2022 11:17:48 GMT -8
In any event, I'm not quite sure how to pitch it to the uninitiated. The closest I can think of is "Imagine if Charlie Kaufman directed a feature-length Rick and Morty that included touches of Inception and The Matrix, combined with family drama and martial-arts action." But even that feels like it doesn't quite get to the heart of the film's madcap energy. I emphasized Michel Gondry in my description, because this most closely resembles his collaborations with writer Charlie Kaufman (especially Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), in how the primary environments are dim, cluttered gray/beige interiors, while also jumping around to flashes of more lush outdoor settings. Gondry also directed the "Everlong" music video for The Foo Fighters, in which singer Dave Grohl has giant hands (which evoke the hot-dog hands of this film). The stuff with the boulders reminded me a bit of Spike Jonze's Where The Wild Things Are. Rick & Morty is certainly an apt comparison as well, given the frantic, visually-overwhelming nature of the movie. I would definitely say it leans closer to The Matrix than Inception, though, in terms of people's bodies being taken over by their other selves for combat (similar to the Agent Smiths possessing the bodies of random civilians). It should be noted that Jamie Lee Curtis really showed no vanity at all in this role, letting her breasts and belly hang out under her shirt for all to see. And I thought the actress playing Yeoh's daughter was terrific. Here's a movie that explores nihilistic attitudes while somehow avoiding being depressing (no small feat).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 11, 2022 19:15:01 GMT -8
Let me tell you, I'm pretty mad that this movie is not showing in my local theater (to make room for the Sing 2 Singalong! VOMIT EMOJI) ... because it sounds pretty damn awesome. It's been expanding in theaters for a few weeks (finally went wide this past weekend) and may yet pop up in more. Though I don't expect its run to last long. Suffice to say, if you're able to catch it on a big screen, do so. (Also, the idea that some theaters are playing Sing 2 Singalong fills me with immutable grief. Admittedly it's partly my fault, since I paid to see the non-singalong version, but still.) I emphasized Michel Gondry in my description, because this most closely resembles his collaborations with writer Charlie Kaufman (especially Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), in how the primary environments are dim, cluttered gray/beige interiors, while also jumping around to flashes of more lush outdoor settings. Gondry also directed the "Everlong" music video for The Foo Fighters, in which singer Dave Grohl has giant hands (which evoke the hot-dog hands of this film). The stuff with the boulders reminded me a bit of Spike Jonze's Where The Wild Things Are. Rick & Morty is certainly an apt comparison as well, given the frantic, visually-overwhelming nature of the movie. I would definitely say it leans closer to The Matrix than Inception, though, in terms of people's bodies being taken over by their other selves for combat (similar to the Agent Smiths possessing the bodies of random civilians). The film invites quite a lot of reference points, any number of which could work. I saw someone on the socials compare it to Sliding Doors - which might be the most accurate in terms of boiling the film's plot conceit down to its essence. But what the film does with the idea of alternate realities is infinitely (haha) more interesting than merely featuring alternate realities themselves. Plus, this is a movie that will make people cry with a scene that features nothing but a couple of rocks. At a certain point, it gets beyond description. Stephanie Hsu (who is quite good on Marvelous Mrs. Maisel) was excellent here. Interestingly, the role originally went to Awkwafina, who had to drop out over scheduling conflicts. Not to say that Awkwafina wouldn't have worked in the role (she can do comedy quite well, and has delivered strong dramatic performances in The Farewell and Swan Song), but it may have helped that they cast an actress who wasn't quite as recognizable. You also touch upon an aspect with I think is key to the film's success (and which has most certainly helped it surpass Parasite, at least for the moment, as Letterboxd's highest-rated film of all time). Everything Everywhere grapples with nihilism and despair, but it ultimately believes in hope and kindness. It has a sincere message about decency and the importance of human connection, and it delivers it all while careening wildly from one gut-busting setpiece to another. An incredible accomplishment, but also one that will just make viewers - the ones who seek it out - feel good.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 11, 2022 19:38:22 GMT -8
Wow. I didn't realize that Parasite was that high on that list. I figured that after it won Best Picture, a bunch of people with a chip on their shoulder (about the Oscars, and foreign and/or "art" films) would try to drag down its average. That said, EEAaO will probably stay high on the list if it flies under the radar a bit. I noticed Jamie Lee Curtis promoting it on a morning talk show, and she made a disparaging remark about Marvel films, and if anyone else who worked on that film promotes that sort of attitude, they might get a legion of Marvel fans engaging in some form of backlash. They'd be better off acknowledging the multi-verse aspect without comparing Marvel films unfavourably to it, because it's better to bring people together than divide them (after all, many folks who usually only watch totally-mainstream fare may really enjoy EEAaO).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 12, 2022 5:10:32 GMT -8
Parasite won the Oscar - riding waves of critical acclaim - right before Covid began and Letterboxd exploded in popularity (because millions of people were now stuck at home with plenty of time to watch movies). It was the film on everyone's minds, and it became the de facto film among Letterboxd users, i.e. the film you need to give five stars in order to be one of the True Lovers of CInema. (I currently rate it as four stars on Letterboxd, which probably doesn't bode well for my long-term critical prospects. Oh well.)
It should be noted that the average Letterboxd user is far more engaged with cinema as an artform - and, on the ideological spectrum, markedly more to the left - than the average IMDb user. (Parasite is currently #35 on IMDb, just below Léon: The Professional.) That helps explain why a lot of foreign/art films get a lot more play - and more consistently higher ratings - on Letterboxd, which is far less of a mainstream film site than IMDb.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Apr 12, 2022 11:52:31 GMT -8
Well, at least Parasite and EEAaO don't have to deal with the Snyder cultists who (negative-) review-bomb The Batman on imdb and other places. Warner Bros. gave those dorks an inch by actually releasing the director's cut of Justice League, so now the cultists want to take a mile. I automatically mute anyone on Twitter with the #ReleaseTheSnyderverse hashtag in their bio (obviously I have the hashtag muted as well).
|
|