My Journey in Movies For June 2019

Due to a combination of the Sydney Film Festival, lots of new cinema releases, and just being generally busy, I didn't watch anywhere near as many films this month. But that's not to say I didn't watch any. The early stages of the month were mostly taken up with classic films (classic here being defined as pre-1970), from Hitchcock to Leone. After that, I watched some grittier, more modern releases, before concluding with a couple of light comedies. I managed to not give out a single negative score this month (apart from one new release), so I guess that's a win...?

Vertigo (1958)
Watched On: Blu-Ray
Score: ⭐⭐⭐1/2
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.2/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.3/10
My Review: It pains me to give a Hitchcock film anything lower than 4.5 stars, but this one just isn’t up to scratch with Rear Window or Psycho or even The Birds. It definitely has a very intriguing, well-shot storyline for the first hour or so, with great performances from both of the leads, reaching a crescendo with possibly the best dream sequence in the history of cinema. And then it keeps going, stripping away every strip of likeability that our protagonist had and ultimately not contributing much at all. It ends with a scene that feels more Hitchcockian than any of the unnecessary hour leading up to it, one that brings to mind the climax of Rear Window, but that scene culminates in an ending that is so abrupt and unsatisfying it is almost comical. Overall, Vertigo is a great half a movie.


For A Few Dollars More (1965)
Watched On: Stan Australia
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐1/2
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.1/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.3/10
My Review: Actually better than A Fistful of Dollars. Sergio Leone’s great camerawork is complemented with a more complex story with better characters and even more action. Clint Eastwood’s Man With No Name is badass as always, but it’s Lee Van Cleef who really steals the show here, his elegance contrasting perfectly with Eastwood’s grittiness, with a believable backstory and motivations to boot. The film also has a great villain, who is menacing throughout and is explored as the story progresses. Not many Westerns would take the time to develop their villains, but this one does. The soundtrack is fantastic, and feels much more thematically appropriate than in Fistful. There were a couple of scenes where diegetic sound was important to the plot but the score drowned it out, but it’s still a great score. At 132 minutes as opposed to 99, it loses some of Fistful’s breeziness, but there is not a moment wasted and the constant action ensures that it never drags. The action is perfectly edited and choreographed much better than was the industry standard at the time. This is the deeper, darker second entry, and further carves out the space for the Dollars Trilogy to become one of my favourite trilogies of all time. Bring on The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.


Sherlock, Jr. (1924)
Watched On: YouTube
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.3/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.2/10
My Review: Quietly amusing and quirky. It boasts some fantastic special effects for the time and contains one of the greatest dream sequences ever in film (which I also said earlier this month when reviewing Vertigo). It’s compelling, light viewing that doesn’t require too much thinking but is certainly entertaining and funny. Buster Keaton is fantastic and it’s amazing how much can be communicated without conventional dialogue. A high four from me. I’d definitely recommend it to people who want to go back to the early days of cinema.






The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966)
Watched On: Stan Australia
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.4/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.8/10
My Review: It’s now no surprise to me that Sergio Leone’s The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is considered one of the greatest films ever made. The epic conclusion to Leone’s Dollars Trilogy (that is as standalone as the other two installments), it frames an epic journey to $200,000 buried in a grave against a backdrop of the American Civil War. It is part-western, part-war film, and does each side justice with some of the best cinematography I’ve ever seen complimented by extraordinary editing and a relentlessly hummable score. While Clint Eastwood’s Blondie is still as stoic and badass as he was in the previous two films, he’s given new depth by his setting. In the third act, his act of kindness towards a dying army captain solidified his place as a hero rather than a antihero. He makes up the ‘Good’ part of the title, and is joined by Lee Van Cleef as the ‘Bad’, a more villainous rendition of the character he played in For a Few Dollars More, and Tuco (the ‘Ugly’), whose hyper-excitedness is a good counterpoint for Eastwood’s man of few words. It’s the interactions between these three that give the film much of it’s sense of humour, which is often perfectly realised by the editing. 
The war steadily grows in the background until it is inescapable and the characters have to cross battlegrounds to get to the grave. There is very much an anti-war sentiment here (the film looks down on both sides rather than framing one as heroic) and it blends surprisingly well with the western aspects. In a way, the soldiers are similar to the titular gunslingers, pettily duelling over a few small bits of land, or a few small bags of coins. 
And duel they do, climaxing in a three-way gunfight that is perhaps the most brilliantly edited and scored scene of the entire film.
The ending is very satisfying, and as the last man standing rides into the mid-afternoon sun, you know only one thing: you’ve just witnessed a true masterpiece.

Snowpiercer (2013)

Watched On: Stan Australia

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐1/2

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.6/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.1/10

My Review: Great direction, great performances, really cool world building. Actually decently funny for such dark plot points. I really enjoyed it’s use of slow motion, which emphasises every breath, step and blow. Some of the action scenes were a little chaotic - not hard-to-follow, per se, but the camerawork was very shaky - and some of the editing was a bit choppy, but none of those things really bothered me that much. This is an excellent modern sci-fi film with fantastic visuals, and is certainly an underrated gem.

Dirty Harry (1971)

Watched On: Netflix AU

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.8/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.8/10

My Review: Dirty Harry is a classic crime film that still holds up brilliantly today. This is partly due to how many films appear to have taken inspiration from it since then (I noticed similarities to movies such as Speed and Die Hard With a Vengeance). Clint Eastwood is great as always as the titular character while all of the supporting cast also deliver good performances, particularly Andy Robinson as the psychotic ‘Scorpio’ killer. The film is fantastically edgy and definitely is a product of it’s time, as a story that could almost exclusively be told in the fallout of Vietnam. The screenplay is immensely quotable (‘Do I feel lucky? Well, do you, punk?’) and the cinematography is actually above average, which I wasn’t expecting. There are a couple of examples of nice composition, and there’s a brilliant shot at the end of the stadium scene. The action scenes are all entertaining and easy-to-follow, right through to the film’s brilliantly bittersweet ending. If I had some gripes with the film, they’d be related to the lighting (some scenes are way too dark). I’d have also liked to see some of the supporting characters get further fleshed out. Those are only minor things, though; this was really good.

Hero (2002)

Watched On: DVD

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.8/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.9/10

My Review: Hero, a 2002 Hong Kongian martial arts film, takes inspiration from Akira Kurosawa’s Rashomon to craft one of, if not the, most beautiful films I’ve ever seen. In fact, I’d go so far to say that this is the superior film between the two. Each portion of the film is distinguished by a different colour, from red to blue to green and more. This is visually striking by itself but is made even more stunning by the brilliant cinematography. I could praise the visuals of this film for days but I don’t want to make it seem like this is style over substance. There is a real story here, about love, unity, and the power of mind and words over violence. All of the performances are great and the story structure is perfect. All of the action scenes are fantastic - standouts included the black-and-white fight between Jet Li and Donnie Yen in their minds, and a bit where Li and Maggie Cheung fend off against a bunch of arrows using a sword and, in Cheung’s case, cloth. Some of the scenes also use slow motion to visceral effect. 

Hero is both effortlessly cool and staggeringly beautiful, and we really can only thank Quentin Tarantino for bringing this masterpiece to English audiences.

Groundhog Day (1993)
Watched On: DVD
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.9/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.0/10
My Review: Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray. If I could change one thing about it, I might use editing to tighten some of the repeated scenes so that it becomes less repetitive. Still, this was pretty good.

Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray. If I could change one thing about it, I might use editing to tighten some of the repeated scenes so that it becomes less repetitive. Still, this was pretty good. Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray. If I could change one thing about it, I might use editing to tighten some of the repeated scenes so that it becomes less repetitive. Speaking of repetitive, I feel like I’ve written this before. Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray. If I could change one thing about it, I might use editing to tighten some of the repeated scenes so that it becomes less repetitive. I’m starting to identify with the existential horror story of being stuck in the same day over and over, unable to make your mark on the world until, inexplicably, you do. Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray, who I should start taking the advice of. Maybe I should repeatedly kill myself. Hold on, I’ll go and get the DVD of Jurassic Park III.  Groundhog Day is a funny and touching romantic comedy featuring a great performance from Bill Murray. Killing myself with a talking raptor didn’t work, so I guess I’ll just be nice to everyone instead. Joe Johnston, all is forgiven! Hey, I’ve made it past 6 am! Hey Joe, your movie’s shit!

The Upside (2019)
Watched On: Amazon Prime
Score: ⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.2/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 6.8/10
My Review: The Upside was a charming, completely inoffensive film. Kevin Hart was okay but Bryan Cranston was fantastic in his role as a quadriplegic. Nicole Kidman, meanwhile, sounded like she was struggling to suppress her accent. Some of the cinematography was nice and the film had a good message, but the script was definitely very cliche. After about a minute, you’ll probably be able to predict every succeeding plot point. What you might not be able to predict are the jarring diversions into Hart-brand comedy, including a scene involving a shower, which add comic relief that wasn’t really necessary. It would be nice if they had just let the film stand on it’s own without feeling the need to add in comedy, because the over-the-top shenanigans  of Hart’s character on his own feel a world away from the gentle humour that his chemistry with Cranston brings to the film. 
Overall, I’d say that the film is good. However, just like how Cranston’s character gives Hart specific orders not to go to any extraordinary measures to revive him, I wouldn’t recommend going to any extraordinary measures to watch this film.

Ranking For the Month:
9. The Upside
8. Vertigo
7. Groundhog Day
6. Sherlock Jr.
5. Dirty Harry
4. Snowpiercer
3. For a Few Dollars More
2. Hero
1. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Double Feature: ANIMA/Parasite (2019) REVIEW

Another week, another double feature review. This format is beginning to grow on me; I can kill two birds with one stone and perhaps allow a lesser known film ride some of the success of a more popular one. In this post's case, I'm lumping a brand new short film with the probable front runner for this year's Best Foreign Language Feature Oscar. Let's jump right into the former....

ANIMA is a brand new fifteen-minute short film created in a collaboration between musician Thom Yorke (of Radiohead fame) and director Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood, Punch-Drunk Love, Phantom Thread). For PTA fans, this was a welcome surprise,as Anderson hasn't directed anything since the aforementioned Phantom Thread in 2017. The plot of the short is a little difficult to describe without going into specifics as it's almost certainly metaphorical. Let's just say it follows an unnamed man (Yorke), who attempts to return a lost item in a very strange world.

ANIMA could be described as music video - it's scored by Yorke songs and it's simplistic story definitely make it feel like one. However, there is a lot of interesting cinematography and visual storytelling that sets it apart from the thousands of music videos on the market. There is not a single word of dialogue spoken, but every movement tells us everything we need to know about Yorke's leading character. Every action is choreographed like a dance, and the dream-like, sometimes violent, movements are a spectacle to behold, as are is the surreal set design. This short could only have been directed by a true master of cinema, and I highly recommend it. It is, after all, only fifteen minutes of your time.

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐

Disclaimer: I don't really understand how Korean names work and therefore may have made mistakes in spelling, punctuation and order. Feel free to correct me, and sorry about that.

Parasite (AKA Gisaengchung) is the latest film from South Korean auteur Bong Joon-ho. It stars longtime Joon-ho collaborator Song Kang-ho as Ki-taek, the father of a lower class family in South Korea. When son Ki-woo (Choi Woo-sik) gets a job as an English tutor to the daughter in a wealthy family, Ki-taek devises a plan to infiltrate the house in the form of a driver, a housekeeper (in the case of mother Yeon-kyo) and an art teacher (in the case of daughter Ki-jung). However, they soon discover that things are not all they seem in the large house the wealthy family occupies. Parasite has already been showered with festival awards, winning the Palm d'Or at this year's Cannes Festival, as well as the top prize at this year's Sydney Film Festival. 

All that praise is well-deserved. Parasite is a fantastic deconstruction of class and wealth. Let's start with the screenplay, which is phenomenal. The film is much funnier than you might expect from a premise that doesn't really inspire laughter. It's hard to make English-speaking audiences laugh with subtitles but my theatre was loving the comedy in this. Don't get me wrong; this is very much a dark comedy, with a spectacular third-act twist. Every element is well-set up and comes into play later; I find it pretty astonishing that Joon-ho turned this film around in two years, as it feels like decades of thought have been put into its complex, deceptively simple plot. It is unpredictable but never cheats the audience. Every character is great, but special attention has to be given to the characterisation of Ki-taek. I wouldn't really call him the main character but it is often his actions which act as the catalyst for the plot points. The script weaves in subtext in a way that doesn't feel forced, making the commentary essential to every motivation and event rather than forcing it upon the story. The characters never explain what they're feeling; the emotion is all palpable. 

Part of this is the performances, and all four of the central thespians are very strong in their roles. Again, Kang-ho is the standout. They all have great chemistry and their interactions feel naturalistic. All of the supporting characters do some exceptional work, too. The cinematography is exceptional, boasting many great examples of composition and camera movement. The direction is also great; Joon-ho mounts tension and suspense in an almost Hitchcockian way I rarely see these days, and he never skimps on the payoff, either. All of this culminates in a brilliantly edited sequence that is both cathartic and brutal (or perhaps cathartic through its brutality), a final expression of rage at the unfairness of the South Korean class system. For such a specific problem, it is surprisingly universal and all the characters are supremely relateable.

In short, Parasite is nothing less than a masterpiece that could honestly be taught in film classes. Every person who worked on the film is clearly at their best and it is one of the most engaging and shocking experiences I've had at the cinema in months. It is easily the best film of the year so far and I would even say that if it had been released last year, it would have been my favourite film of that year, too. It's the kind of film that feels destined to become a classic (at least among cinephiles), the rare kind of foreign language film that could find a place in, say, the iMDB Top 250, and hold it there for the foreseeable future. Everybody needs to see this film, and I encourage every one of you to find where it's being shown near you and see it. I don't care if you have to drive for hours, do it.

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Double Feature: I Am Mother/Rocketman (2019) REVIEW

I'm pretty backed up as far as reviews for new releases go at the moment (everything seems to be coming out at once), so I thought I'd combine these two films into one post. Both reviews might be shorter than a normal one.  Without further ado...

 I Am Mother is the new sci-fi Netflix film, which is the directorial debut of Australian director Grant Sputore. It follows a young girl (Clara Rugaard) who is raised in some sort of bunker by a robot named Mother (voiced by Rose Byrne), who tells her that the world outside has been fatally contaminated and only refers to her as Daughter. However, their sheltered existence is shattered when a survivor (Hilary Swank) appears...

Right off the bat, the first thing you'll notice is how great the production design is. Much of the film is spent in the bunker, and it looks fantastic, a minor miracle given what I can only assume was a small, Netflix movie budget. The long corridors are eerie and sterile and the mood is consistently claustrophobic. I don't think it's a spoiler to say that you do get to see some of the world outside the bunker, and what is there is creepy, unique and strangely beautiful. I'll speak no more of it since the outside world does form part of a series of reveals.

Another technical achievement is the design of Mother. A mixture of practical effects and CGI, it looks real the entire way through, the illusion helped by small details such as the lights on the side of its head and stickers that Daughter has put on it in the past. The only nitpick that I have with the design is that it looks a little too immobile. This is not a problem in itself but whenever Mother runs down a corridor it breaks my suspension of disbelief because I find it hard to believe that a robot designed like Mother is would be that agile. It doesn't help that the running effect isn't fantastic on it's own.

I also enjoyed the story and how twisty it was. It's definitely a movie that pulls the rug out from under you multiple times and leads you to question the motivations of the two supporting characters. I also think that the film has some considerable subtext and I read it as a metaphor for sheltering your children from the horrifying reality of the outside world and whether that is ethical. I can't really dig much more into it without getting into spoilers; this movie is a little difficult to write about in a spoiler-free review. I don't think I care quite enough to do a spoiler review but I wish I knew someone else who had seen it so as to discuss the film's themes and twists with them.

As great as the film is conceptually and technically, it does have some problems in the execution. `For one, I wasn't the biggest fan of the acting in this movie. Clara Rugaard was meh, while Swank was overacting a bit, in my opinion. The exception to this rule was Byrne, whose warm voice makes her perfect for the role of a seemingly friendly robot A.I. There is often menace hidden in her amiable tones that elevates Mother above the average movie robot. I also found the pacing of the film to be a bit off. This may be partly my interest levels but I felt the film really hit lulls at the start and end of the second act that considerably slowed it down.

Overall, though, I Am Mother is a notch above most Netflix original films, with great production value, a good script and a standout performance from Rose Byrne. However, it is held back from being truly great by some bad acting and pacing.

Score: ⭐⭐⭐1/2


Listening to 'Saturday Night's Alright' as I write this. Rocketman is a musical biopic that follows Elton John (Taron Egerton) as he navigates his rise to fame, his drug and alcohol addiction, his relationship with manager John Reid (Richard Madden), as well as the other people in his life, including his songwriter (Jamie Bell) and mother (Bryce Dallas Howard). Directed by Dexter Fletcher, it has positioned itself as the edgier alternative to last year's Queen biopic Bohemian Rhapsody, which Fletcher finished off after original director Bryan Singer was fired for being a very creepy man. It has made history as the first major Hollywood film to feature a sex scene between two men. Not only is it changing the face of film, it's also doing seriously original things with the genre in which it takes place. While the music biopic genre has long since become a menagerie of cliched storytelling, this film shakes things up by introducing a musical element and a non-linear narrative. And I was on board the whole way through.

There's almost nothing wrong with this movie. Egerton is electric as John. This is less of an impression than a performance, and is made even more impressive by how Egerton sang all of his own songs, as opposed to Bohemian Rhapsody, where Rami-Malek-as-Freddie-Mercury's vocals were created using a mixture of Malek, an impersonator, and the man himself. Egerton spent a long time living with John and the result of this is a passionate and acurate performance. Though he regularly outshines the other actors, Egerton's is not the only good performance on show. Look no further than Bell as songwriter Bernard Taupin, who embues a chracter who ultimately doesn't have a lot to do with a natural charisma. The chemistry between him and Egerton is the beating heart of the film. Richard Madden as John Reid also functions better as an antagonist than, say, Allen Leacher's Paul Prenter in Bohemian Rhapsody. He is surprisingly menacing, especially coming off Rhapsody where Reid was portrayed as a sympathetic character. I guess it just goes to show how different perspectives can change your perception of a person. These two films would make an interesting double feature. Also impressive is the nearly unrecognisable Bryce Dallas Howard as Elton's mother.

Aside from all the performances, the storytelling in this film is exceptional. This isn't a traditional A-to-B biopic; we start with the adult John in therapy and then flash back to his childhood, flashing back occasionally to add extra emotional heft as John remembers the moments that we've just seen. It's also actually a musical - it doesn't just pause to recreate a concert, the film works classic John songs into the story to amplify it's themes and characters (such as when Elton's mother is introduced to 'The Bitch is Back', and a showstopping, highlight performance of 'Rocket Man' follows John's overcoming of a key obstacle). The film uses this format (and Elton's substance abuse) to it's advantage. Rather than attempting to cover everything in minute detail, it plays fast and loose with the facts; don't be surprised to see fantastical elements in the story. This results in a completely unique story. But the script's genius doesn't stop there; the dialogue is snappy and occasionally heartbreaking, and the understated (and at times obvious) use of metaphors adds an extra dimension to what could have easily been yet another style-over-substance musical. Plus, it's elevated by forming it's entire story around a theme; a theme about the longing for unconditional love, which is what many of Elton's songs are about.

It's surprisingly good-looking. The cinematography is often interesting and the direction of the musical scenes is kinetic without being hard-to-follow. There is a beautiful scene in a pool that is both an achievement in visual effects and cinematography. There are some colour grading choices that I really enjoyed, such as when the bright red of adult Elton's demon costume contrasts with the dull colours of his childhood.

If you can't already tell, I loved Rocketman. It's currently my favourite film of the year and I recommend it to everyone. The beats of the story are maybe a little predictable but the journey to get there is anything but. It's got fantastic performances, great music (obviously) and some pretty good cinematography and narrative structure. Stop rewatching Avengers: Endgame and watch this instead!

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐1/2

Skin (2019) REVIEW - SFF2019

This film was viewed at the Sydney Film Festival 2019. As it was not the only film I saw there, this review may be slightly shorter than usual.

Skin is the latest film from Israeli writer/director Guy Nattiv, who directed the controversial Oscar-winning short film of the same name. It features Jamie Bell as a white supremacist, who, inspired by his girlfriend (Danielle Macdonald), decides to disentangle himself from his skinhead 'family,' who have modelled their rituals after vikings.

The results are a little mixed, though I doubt anyone would argue the fact that Jamie Bell is 100% the most valuable player in this film. His nuanced performance allows the audience to see different layers (be it the hardboiled exterior or the vulnerable aspects) in the character and breathes new life into a surprisingly underwritten character (in that his character arc is pretty much over after thirty minutes and he doesn't have much internal conflict afterwards). All of the other performances are good, too, the exception being Vera Farmiga, who is somewhat flat and unconvincing as the 'mother' of the skinhead clan. Even the child actors are good.

Another definite plus is the atmosphere that the film builds over it's two hour runtime. It's relentless and almost every scene has a degree of tension. I guess you could call it a kind of cat-and-mouse thriller, with the skinheads as the cat and Bell as the mouse. There were also some stylistic touches that I appreciated, such as the depiction of an overdose early on and a later, certainly metaphorical shot involving a burning car. Speaking of metaphors, there're definitely visual motifs and structural metaphors to look into. Over the course of the film, there is a sort-of subplot set around a new recruit to the gang, and it serves as an inverse of the main plot - the recruit is descending while our main character ascends. The subplot feeds into the themes of the main plot, which is exactly what a subplot should do. The film also uses the removal of the main character's tattoos as a framing device, but it also serves as a metaphor for his rejection of white supremacy and the expectations that society has set upon him. These tattoo removal scenes are brutal but elevate the plot.

It's a shame that some of the rest of the film does not live up to the standard set by the aforementioned elements. For one, I found Nattiv's direction quite uneven - there'll be a fantastic shot or stylistic shot one minute, and then a really bad shot the next. There's one scuffle scene early on where the camera was so shaky I a) had no idea what the hell was going on, and b) felt dizzy in my seat. He's definitely got some room to grow but I'd hate to be too negative; I could definitely see him becoming a great director one day.

Meanwhile, it also began to bother me how stupid a lot of the characters' decisions were. Lots of the situations that the main character gets himself into could have been easily avoided. The pacing was also a little off, moving pretty slowly at first then speeding up then slowing to a lazy finish. There wasn't much of a payoff to a lot of the stuff that the film set up and that was disappointing. I also would have liked to see some more conflict in our main character; I would've thought it would be harder to leave the people who raised you, but he makes it look easy, or at least as easy as it can be if the people who raised you are dangerous skinheads. The use of the tattoo removal as a framing device also alleviates some of the tension where it probably shouldn't have been.

Overall, Skin mostly works, but, like it's central character, it is it's own worse enemy, with many of it's best aspects causing problems in the long and short run for the rest of the film. However, I can't deny that it features great performances (including an Oscar-worthy turn from Jamie Bell) and some moments of pure inspiration. It's not the best film you'll see this year, but one that shows promise for all involved.

Score: ⭐⭐⭐1/2

The Souvenir (2019) REVIEW - SFF2019

This film was viewed at the Sydney Film Festival 2019. As it was not the only film I saw there, this review may be slightly shorter than usual.

The Souvenir is the latest film from director Joanna Hogg. It follows a privileged film student (Honor Swinton Byrne) in the 1980s who attempts to make a film about the lower classes in Britain. Meanwhile, she's falling in love with a charismatic older man (Tom Burke) who is hiding something from her.

I am not exaggerating when I say that I am struggling to find any negatives with this film. Every single element is top notch. All of the performances are fantastic, Swinton Byrne (who improvised most of her lines) in particular, who gives the film a likeable natural energy. Burke is also impressive and provides an intriguing hook with his guarded delivery paired with his chemistry with Swinton Byrne. He's also pretty funny in his role. Tilda Swinton (acting alongside her daughter) isn't in the film as much as the trailer might have you believe but she plays against type and makes an instant impression in every scene she's present for.

The cinematography is also great, as is the sound design. The square aspect ratio lends the visuals a pleasing symmetry and Hogg's use of dead space and composition really accentuate the emotions of each of the characters. The camera is mostly stationary so that when it does move it's for a purpose. Many of the takes are impressively long, giving the audience a chance to really emphasise with the characters and feel every silence and non sequitur. This is not a fast film, but it's never boring. The runtime is well-earned and it doesn't overstay it's welcome.

The script is excellent, which is good because the film is 99% conversations. Many of the exchanges of dialogue reward active analysis and pay off later. All of the dialogue is well-written and natural sounding, and the plot is engaging, the characters well-sketched. Even the characters with the smallest roles are distinctive, such as Richard Ayoade's Patrick and Tosin Cole's Phil. The world of the film is also well-developed. On a surface level, the film might appear pretentious with it's beautiful locations and upper-class characters, but Hogg is well aware of this and blends it into the motivations of Swinton Byrne's character.

I'm interested to see where Hogg goes with the upcoming The Souvenir: Part II, which is set to costar Robert Pattinson (who, in the space of a few days, has gone from being 'that guy from Twilight' to 'the new Batman' in the eyes of the casual moviegoer). There are certainly plot points that could be picked up and developed, but the film does not really leave the door open in the way that past Part Is such as The Godfather or Back to the Future have done. Hopefully it is actually the second part of two rather than just a sequel and Hogg has thought the story out from the start of this film through to Part II's ending. I'll certainly be there whenever it gets a release over the next few years.

The Souvenir is a menagerie of talent led by an auteur obviously in her prime, and I highly recommend it, whether you see it at a festival or wait for it's inevitable awards season release.

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐1/2

Dark Phoenix (2019) REVIEW

Despite what Rotten Tomatoes would have you believe, Dark Phoenix is not the worst movie ever, nor the worst X-Men film (I would put The Last Stand and Apocalypse below this). However, that is not to say that this is a great film, or even a particularly good one.

It's hard to know where to begin with this movie, so I guess I'll start with the (few) positives. The action sequences in this (of which there aren't that many) are actually pretty entertaining. Maybe I was just happy to see some punches thrown after the dullness of the film's many conversational scenes, but the fights were easy to follow and creative. The movie utilises each mutant's individual powers much better than most, so we get to see the new renditions of Cyclops (Tye Sheridan), Nightcrawler (Aussie Kodi Smit-McPhee) and Storm (Alexandra Shipp) integrated into the action much more and in more creative ways than in Apocalypse. As a byproduct of this, I found the final setpiece (taking place on a train) pretty engaging. It felt like the film had finally been given the shot of adrenaline it needed from the start. That scene was added in reshoots and I feel like it shows growth for Simon Kinberg as a director. He definitely has the potential to do great things in the action genre.

I think the biggest thing that stood out to me as bad in this film was the acting. There are two classes of thespians in this film: those who clearly don't want to be there and those who are giving it their best but don't have much to work with. The only person who rises above this is Michael Fassbender as Magneto, who is just as captivating here as he was in the previous three films. The rest don't fare as well. James McAvoy, who, in the interim between this instalment and the last, managed to give a career-best performance twice as another superpowered character, the Horde, in M. Night Shyamalan's Split and Glass, is definitely in the latter camp but his performance is severely harmed by his character spending most of the film being an unlikeable jackass and having lots of the worst lines. Tye Sheridan is an actor who I think has a lot of potential but he is given the unfortunate task of carrying a romance that we've never seen previously developed, and, like McAvoy, he gets some horrible lines. He does get the movie's obligatory X-Men f-bomb, so that's something, I guess. Turner doesn't fare very well, though it's a little harder to tell whether that was her fault or Kinberg's, Jennifer Lawrence looks like she's counting the seconds until her paycheck comes in, and Evan Peters is severely underused as Quicksilver. Jessica Chastain is usually pretty good but even she can't save the thankless cold villain character she's saddled with.

It's also clearly a movie directed by a first-time director. This can be seen in the aforementioned performances, but also in the cinematography. This is not a very interesting-looking film, and it is also pretty amateurish in some of it's camerawork and editing. Some of the shots aren't even fully in focus (some of those were stylistic choices, but some definitely weren't), and there are many odd cuts. There is also some awful foley work that a more experienced director would have shut down in a heartbeat. These sorts of things have no place in a blockbuster movie with this much money behind it, especially one that's been in production for years.

And my gripes with Kinberg aren't done yet. He also wrote the film, and the script is no good. It's entirely predictable, which might be down to the fact that the movie's been delayed so much that I've had plenty of time to think about it, but I'm still deducting points for it. The film really drags; for such a short movie, it feels a lot longer than it should. It never gains a sense of urgency or pace - it moves from one situation to the next in a fairly leisurely manner, using it's limited time to stage repetitive conversations that ultimately don't lead anywhere rather than developing the villains, or whoever the hell the main character is meant to be. Most of the character decisions, great and small, make no sense. For example, there's one scene which has a battle outside a house. Xavier is in a park on the other side of the road from the house, and needs to get to it. He calls Nightcrawler over and they teleport... to the curb on the same side of the road that they already were? I nearly yelled, 'WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST TELEPORT TO STRAIGHT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE OR EVEN INSIDE YOU IDIOTS?!?' This is followed by an action scene where all the characters try to get across the road into the house when they could have just teleported there in the first place.

Unfortunately, between it's bad acting, amateur technical aspects and a script that is entirely devoid of logic, Dark Phoenix sends this franchise off on more of a whimper than a bang. It's not the worst this series has to offer but it's positioning as the final instalment makes it hurt that much more. There are some redeeming qualities such as the action sequences and Michael Fassbender's performance, but they do not keep the film afloat for me to recommend this to anybody who isn't already a fan of this franchise.

Score: ⭐⭐1/2

My Journey in Movies For May 2019

And here's what else I've been watching this month! To save time and avoid repeating myself, I've copy-and-pasted my Letterboxd reviews in where applicable. Some of these are joke reviews, so you'll have to rely on my score to tell you what I thought. I've also overhauled the format of these entries a little bit, telling you some information about the film etc. I watched a lot more this month without an MCU rewatch to take up my time...

78/52 (2017)

Watched On: NETFLIX AU
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.6/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.3/10
My Review: Imagine if you were one of the interviewees on this and didn’t have anything interesting to say about the shower scene.


12 Angry Men (1957)

Watched On: Stan Australia
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.5/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.9/10


The Fog (1980)

Watched On: Blu-Ray (Carpenter Cult Classics Edition)
Score: ⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Score: 3.5/5
Avg. iMDB Score: 6.8/10
My Review: The signature Carpenter cinematography and colour boost it a bit, as do a few genuinely scary scenes and striking imagery, and it’s never boring, but The Fog really suffers from a meandering plot and stiff characters matched by equally wooden acting. For a movie that spends so long jumping between different townsfolk, I never felt much of a connection to any of them, or a geographical or spiritual understanding of the town itself. It’s very short but it wastes so much time, and, once we do get to the admittedly well-shot finale, the ending is hardly satisfying. Still, that scene on the boat near the start elevates above the mediocre film it’s a part of to become a truly great horror sequence. There’s lots of Carpenter and co.’s potential brimming just under the surface, but it is still under the surface. Watch The Thing instead.


Rashomon (1950)

Watched On: DVD (Criterion Collection)
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.2/10
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.3/10
My Review: Akira Kurosawa’s Rashomon is a rumination on sin, life and death (with some gender politics thrown in as well). Despite a weak first act that definitely dragged along a little (just lots of shots of people walking/running through the forest), once the film hits it’s stride, it’s fantastic. Kurosawa crafts an ambiguous storyline that introduces several distinctive, memorable characters, with intense, well-choreographed fight scenes and several moments that resonated with me on an emotional level. The editing was also on point, and the film has some really nice camerawork that makes good use of pans, composition and symmetry. Definitely worth a watch.


Django Unchained (2012)

Watched On: Blu-Ray (Standard Edition)
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.1/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.4/10
My Review: Quentin Tarantino’s revenge fantasy epic is fantastic. It’s got great performances from Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson, Kerry Washington and especially Christoph Waltz, who is consistently charismatic and hilarious. The screenplay by Tarantino is perfectly paced, engaging and often hilarious (the comedic highlight for me was the bag scene), and his direction showcases his skills in composition and lighting. I usually hate crash zooms because I associate them with mid-2000s studio comedies, but they lend Django a style that sets it apart from the other twenty-first century attempts to revive the Western genre. It’s the first film I’ve seen from Tarantino and he lives up to what I had thought might be impossible expectations. The editing is also very effective. I appreciated the efforts to emulate the spaghetti westerns of old such as the Leone-like font in the opening and closing titles and the score. The film also blends in some anachronistic modern songs in a way that surprisingly works. If anything, it enhances the story’s timeless themes of racial tolerance (at least, racial issues through the heightened reality of Tarantino). For a nearly three hour movie, it goes by at a good pace. You definitely feel the length, but it never bored me. Also, as an Australian, it amused me that Tarantino’s cameo character was, too. Surprisingly, he pulls off a pretty accurate accent and speech pattern. I’ve heard people say he’s a bad actor, but he was alright here. I guess I might see that as I go through his filmography eventually.


Escape From New York (1981)

Watched On: Blu-Ray (Carpenter Cult Classics Edition)
Score: ⭐⭐⭐1/2
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.7/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.2/10
My Review: John Carpenter's Escape From New York is a good movie with a great concept. Not only is the premise of the film so enticing, there's also a lot of commentary to be mined from it (especially in these days, as the emphasis on preventing terrorism paired with the growing advantages of technology leave some people feeling the governments of the world are compromising their civil liberties for the sake of security). The movie mostly ignores the latter aspect, but you're still left with a stylish dystopian action movie. There's nothing too special here; Carpenter's signature use of colour is present but his usual above-average cinematography isn't, all of the performances (apart from a very memorable henchman character) are fine, some of the effects have aged better than others, and most of the cool original ideas are used up by the end of the first act. However, the movie is definitely more than the sum of it's parts, and although the storyline is fairly generic past the premise, the film leaves enough of a taste that I think it will be memorable in my mind and entice me to revisit it one day.
I'm enjoying going through selected movies from this writer/director's filmography and seeing his growth. This is undoubtedly a more solid effort than his preceding film, The Fog, but it does not quite reach the heights that that film had hidden amongst it's lows. This is the second of three movies in my mini Carpenter watchthrough, and for the next one I'll be backtracking a little bit to see what is arguably his most famous work, a horror film set in Haddonfield, Illinois, on Halloween night.

Halloween (1978)

Watched On: DVD (from the Halloween 1  - 5 Collection)
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.8/10
My Review: Halloween pretty much shows you exactly what’s wrong with horror movies today. Hitchcock once said that (I’m paraphrasing) in a movie, if you put a bomb under a table and it blows up unexpectedly, that’s a shock, but if you show the audience that there’s a bomb under the table and tell them that it will go off in five minutes, that’s suspense. So many movies these days value shock over real suspense (especially due to the current popularity of jumpscares). 
Look how suspenseful this movie is, with all it’s slow tracking shots and times when Michael Myers approaches from the background. That bit where Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) collapses against a dark doorway and Myers’ white mask slowly comes into the light next to her is bloody nightmare fuel. I could never say that about a jumpscare in last year’s instalment of this franchise. 
It’s also fantastically atmospheric and goes to show how it created the slasher formula and everybody else stole it and made lesser versions. It’s easy to forget how much time the film spends with each character before killing them off. The kills are, if not emotional, much more shocking than if we’d just been introduced to them. Characters also have realistic reactions to these murders. Michael Myers (or The Shape, as the movie credits him) is actually pretty scary in this one. He’s a lot faster and more agile than later films in the series would have you believe. The effect of keeping him in shadows and obscuring his mask makes him a lot more mysterious. There’s never a big reveal moment for his full appearance, because the characters never have a moment to catch their breath. 
If there’s one negative I have, some of the other teen’s acting is.... meh. This usually happens in these sort of movies, because the director usually puts much more effort into casting the main lead than the side characters (see also Split).
It’s pretty amazing that I can give a movie five stars but not call it my favourite of that director’s (The Thing is proving hard to beat). Very few directors have scored more than one five star rating from me (off the top of my head I can only think of Hitchcock, Spielberg, Nolan and Zemeckis), and John Carpenter joins that list.

Synecdoche, New York (2008)
Watched On: NETFLIX AU
Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.1/5
Avg. iMDB Rating: 7.5/10
My Review: 
FIVE MINUTES IN: Why does everybody say this is so complex? It’s pretty straightforward.

ONE HOUR LATER: Wait, what?

Burn After Reading (2008)

Watched On: DVD (Standard Edition)

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3.5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 7/10

My Review: Really fun movie. John Malkovich, George Clooney, J.K. Simmons and Frances McDormand were all really good, but Brad Pitt was the standout. Great screenplay too.

Godzilla (2014)

Watched On: Digital (Rented from the PlayStation Store)

Score: ⭐⭐1/2

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 3/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 6.4/10

My Review: The movie really comes alive during the action sequences, and I get the feeling Gareth Edwards cared more about those than the rest of the movie, which is a problem when the action sequences are pretty spaced out in the script. Since the director stops caring about making it look good in those scenes, all you’re left with is paper-thin characters, bad acting, horrible dialogue and a total waste of Sally Hawkins.

Velvet Buzzsaw (2019)

Watched On: NETFLIX AU

Score: ⭐⭐⭐

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 2.5/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 5.7/10

My Review: It had some inventive scares and Jake Gyllenhaal was fantastic in his role, but this was a mostly uneventful horror movie with bad pacing and poor scene transitions. It’s a shame, too, given the occasionally good dialogue and some good cinematography. It’s redeeming qualities are entertaining enough for me to not give this a negative score but I don’t think I’d really recommend it to anyone.

Paths of Glory (1957)

Watched On: Stan Australia

Score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Avg. Letterboxd Rating: 4.3/5

Avg. iMDB Rating: 8.4/10

My Review: Great Kubrick film that changes from a war movie to an equally intense courtroom drama halfway through. The performances are all fantastic, especially Kirk Douglas, and the screenplay (co-written by Kubrick) is fantastic and more darkly satirical and occasionally hilarious than you might expect from a black-and-white movie named Paths of Glory. Plus, the cinematography is all great, whether it’s the long takes following a commanding officer through a trench or Douglas across no-man’s-land, or the impossibly precise pans in the courtroom scenes. Many moral questions are raised, and are dealt with realistically and thought-provokingly. Highly recommended, especially since it tends to get overshadowed by other Kubrick efforts such as 2001, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket.

Ranking For the Month:

12. Godzilla

11. Velvet Buzzsaw

10. The Fog

9. Escape From New York

8. 78/52

7. Rashomon

6. Burn After Reading

5. Halloween

4. Synecdoche, New York
3. Paths of Glory
2. Django Unchained
1. 12 Angry Men

Trailer Round-Up #3 (May 2019)

It's that time of month again where I review all the latest trailers. Thankfully, there aren't as many as last month, but there are still a few to get to, so let's dive right in!

A Rainy Day in New York (2019) Official Trailer


May as well get the controversial one out of the way first. As you probably already know if you frequent IndieWire or any other fine movie news establishment, Woody Allen is having truckloads of trouble securing a distributor for his latest romantic comedy, A Rainy Day in New York, due to the decades-old sexual assault allegations against him (the evidence for which is dodgy at best, I impartially add) that have resurfaced after the #MeToo movement. Amazon has now dropped the film, so Allen is back to selling the (completed) film around, and this month he released a trailer on his Facebook page. And, I mean, it looks okay. I'm interested in the film mostly because of the controversy, and it's got a great cast. I do like movies about movies, though, so the characters are kind of interesting to me. This trailer shows way too much of the plot, in my opinion.

Brightburn (2019) Final Trailer

For some reason, Sony decided to release a 'Final Trailer' for Brightburn just days before the movie gets released. It's basically just a reedited second trailer with most of the same footage, which seems kind of pointless. You guys already know that I've had my issues with the two previous Brightburn trailers, and since this is basically just the second trailer, my thoughts haven't changed. I'm still on the fence about seeing the movie in cinemas or just waiting for a Blu-Ray release. I have a friend who's seeing the film as I write this so I guess I'll let his opinion shape my final decision. There're so many movies coming out this month (infuriatingly, some on the same days, such as Godzilla and Rocketman) that I have to make a couple of sacrifices somewhere.

Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) Official Trailer


*when Tom Holland showed up at the start of the trailer to tell us to avoid Endgame spoilers*
ME: Wow, these movies have gotten meta, haven't they?
Don't worry, I'll be avoiding Endgame spoilers in this post. This trailer was pretty good. I like the places that they're taking Peter emotionally and this new worldbuilding sounds cool. Plus, Jake Gyllenhaal is in it. 'Nuff said.

Midsommar (2019) Official Trailer


Ah, I always welcome the chance to venture over to the A24 YouTube channel to review one of their trailers. With this one, Midsommar just shot up on my anticipation meter for 2019. The cinematography looks great and the film sounds really intriguing. I often find that A24 gives away a bit too much in their trailers but this one definitely had the right balance of plot and mystery. Turns out the white bars aren't going to be in the final movie. That A24 logo is so cool. This review has just descended into random thoughts now because the trailer does such a good job of keeping the film's mysteries under wraps.

The Farewell (2019) Official Trailer

While we're on the A24 hype train, cast your eyes over to The Farewell, a new Awkwafina dramedy tearjerker. I wasn't a huge fan of Awkwafina in Crazy Rich Asians; to be honest, she kind of irritated me, but I'm willing to put that down to her being given bad dialogue because apparently she's excellent in this, and she looks like it in the trailer. This was a pretty great trailer, too; it didn't give away too much (I mean, in terminal illness movies, you kind of know the outcome, but still) and succeeded in representing the drama and comedy parts of the story. I also just really like the poster. It looks strangely like a Yorgos Lanthimos poster, for some reason (probably the colour palette, although the similarity between the titles for The Farewell and The Favourite might be adding to that sensation). It doesn't currently have a release date in Australia, which worries me because A24 doesn't have the greatest track record with Australian distribution (it took us until this year to get Eighth Grade). Hopefully it'll get some awards buzz so they fast-track their distribution plan.

In Fabric (2019) Official Trailer

Ah, what the hell, let's keep going with the A24 trailers. Third and finally is In Fabric, a new British horror film seemingly inspired by the giallo (Italian horror) subgenre. It's going to be screening at the Sydney Film Festival in like a week's time. I'm intrigued by this film's strong visual aesthetic and unique premise (a demon dress), and I know SFF might be the only chance I get to see this film for a long while, but I'm not entirely convinced, not enough to spend money on. Again, the trailer looks good, but it's so vague that I'm not entirely sure that I'll like it.

The Goldfinch (2019) Official Trailer

Let's leave A24 behind and talk about what is shaping up to be Warner Bros.' big Oscar movie for this year, The Goldfinch. The trailer kind of surprised me because from the premise I expected some sort of crime thriller, not what looks to be a contemplative character study of a man with some sort of PTSD. Still looks pretty good, though, and it's got a phenomenal cast.

Toy Story 4 (2019) Official Trailer #2


Now that we've talked about some heavier movies, let's move on to some lighter ones and look at some Disney and Pixar trailers. The first of these is for Toy Story 4, which I'm moved from being ambivalent towards to cautiously excited for. This trailer is a definite improvement on the last one. It's much funnier, for a start - that post-title sting had me laughing - and the story does not look as similar to 2 and 3 as the previous one did, so maybe that one was just edited to be like that. The animation also looks really nice. Plus, Keanu Reeves is in it.

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (2019) Official Teaser

Now for a movie that absolutely no one's excited for, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. I remember watching the first movie a long time ago (probably around four years have passed at this point) and thinking it was... okay? Didn't exactly blow me away, and looking back on it the only things I can remember about it was that the actress who played Delores Umbridge in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was in it and there was a bit where (spoilers, I guess) Maleficent got her wings cut off. Needless to say, I don't really care about this series, and with the title that seemingly contradicts the ending of the first film, I don't think Disney does, either.

Onward (2020) Official Teaser


I'm very excited for Pixar to be doing some more original films after the recent trend of sequels and prequels to their earlier glories, but this trailer kind of disappointed me. It took me a second to pinpoint what was wrong with it, but I think I figured it out: it doesn't look like a Pixar film. I'm not just talking about the animation, but I'll touch on that first: the characters in this film look too real; they look more like Dreamworks Animation characters, which is a problem I also had with certain characters in Incredibles 2. The story also feels kind of generic and less creative than Pixar's other films.

I Am Mother (2019) Official Trailer


While it's very annoying that this trailer shows WAY too much (watch at your own risk), this still looks like a pretty good movie. It's also Australian, so extra points for that. While I do find it a bit strange that they named the robot Mother when the A.I. in the Alien franchise is also called Mother, hopefully this won't be too derivative. I mean, it's available to you in your own home, so why wouldn't you watch it?

IT: Chapter Two (2019) Official Teaser

I liked the look of this one. I haven't seen 2017's IT but I have read the book and seen the 1990s TV version. As such, I can't pass a whole lot of judgement, but let's just say it looks good and creepy.

There were a few other trailers that came out this month, but none that I really feel I have much to say about. Other ones include the Melissa McCarthy thriller The Kitchen, which looked fine, and Rambo: Last Blood, which, having not see any of the four preceding films, I don't really feel qualified to speak about.

Thanks for reading!