29. I, Tonya (2017) - January 29th
This one had excellent performances, but left me conflicted by the presentation of its story. My full review can be found here. - 7.5/10
30. Species II (1998) - January 29th
The first Species is mediocre, a bit of stupid exploitation with a monster designed by H.R. Giger that makes for an okay romp. The second film somehow manages to make the premise of an alien hybrid species that wants to bang the human race to death utterly boring. There's a handful of scenes in the film that are memorable for their shock value or effects work; there's even one piece of off-colour humour that drew a reaction out of me. Apart from those scant few minor positives, the film is an utter waste of time comparable to one of the lesser Friday the 13th sequels (not quite Jason Takes Manhattan bad, closer to The New Blood). The writing is awful, even for bad exploitation, with regular moments of complete nonsense and constant stilted dialogue that's delivered with no sense of enthusiasm or self-awareness; that in turn draws attention to just how awful the dialogue is too. It's a real shame too, because the concept is insane enough that the film has occasional flashes of a better film beneath the surface, but there isn't anything done with the material that wasn't done better than the first film, so we get a double-helping of negativity as we see the film do something very poorly when we've already seen it done considerably better (although still not exactly good). Even as the film ramps up the disgusting factor several times over, there's been absolutely no investment thus far and it just comes off as offensive. On the plus side, there's at least now a definitive worst movie I've seen this year so far, and I still haven't found a movie worth giving a 1/10. I'd almost forgotten about movies this bad - 2/10
31. Jack Frost (1997) - January 30th
In the late 90s, there was a family movie called Jack Frost, about a man named Jack Frost (Michael Keaton) who dies in a car accident and comes back as a snowman to make things right for the family he could never be there for in life. In the year before that movie's release, there was another movie called Jack Frost, in which a man named Jack Frost (Scott MacDonald) dies in a car accident and comes back as a snowman to go on a vengeful killing spree. Guess which one I watched?
This movie is so very awful, but watching a bad movie is always more entertaining with a friend, and that factor combined with the sheer hilarity of the film's ineptitude and some self-awareness makes it bearable in a 'so bad it's good' way.
The thing that makes this notably better than the likes of, well, Species II, is how clear the film makes what it's doing is not meant to be taken seriously in any way, shape or form. A mutant killer snowman is made only to be laughed at, and thankfully those working on the movie don't try to make the film something it's not. Unfortunately, little is done beyond getting humour out of the concept alone; so much of the rest is just a realisation of limitation that leads to giving up or not trying instead of creativity or perseverance. This works a little for the comedy angle, just using the snowman liberally even if the effects look awful adds a surprising amount of fun, and when the kills are as absurd as stuffing an ax down someone's throat in one swing and dropping a one-liner like "I just wanted to ax you for a cigarette", or a litany of snow puns, or turning someone in to an elaborate and bloody Christmas decoration, them looking terrible stops being a detractor altogether, at least ironically.
The thing that never fails to completely disappoint in these movies, however, is the acting. It's always the absolute worst, with character voice volume changing seemingly at random and outtakes indistinguishable from actual takes, and stiff or unfeeling work most of the time. The exception is Macdonald as Jack, whose pure ham-fisted over-the-top performance is the only thing that's actually funny rather than unintentionally so.
One other surprisingly positive aspect of this terrible movie is the soundtrack. It's a lot of oddly appropriate classical pieces and classic rock numbers or heavy metal renditions of Christmas songs that enhance the comedic energy of some of its stupider scenes.
I was expecting this movie to be terrible on the level of Species II, but it simply wasn't. It's still very bad, but it's never boring and the comedy actually lands occasionally - 4/10
32. Darkest Hour (2017) - January 31st
This was a good film made great by its leading performance. My full review can be found here.
33. Chef (2014) - February 3rd
Well, this movie made me very hungry.
In a way this could be taken as a metaphor for Favreau's own journey as a filmmaker, becoming a big success that gives him stability but also directs him to do more of the same that ultimately feels hollow and leaves him conflicted as to why he's doing what he's doing, so he goes back to basics and finds creativity in that. It's just an idea, but dialogue between Favreau's Casper and Hoffman's Riva feel like real conversations between a director and a producer, transposed to suit the kitchen environment.
'Back to basics' feels like an appropriate way to describe this movie; it's familiar in structure, but carries a certain weight of experience that I can't quite put my finger on at a technical level. It all fits right and feels nice, like meeting an old friend you haven't seen in a while; they look a little different, but a lot of who they are is just as likable and understandable as you remember. It's nothing new or life-changing, but it's always pleasant without being bland.
All of the style in this film that keeps it from slipping from pleasantness in to boredom is in the food. As I said, this movie made me very hungry, because it puts an incredible amount of effort in to being a literal feast for the eyes. The film combines its deliciousness with a bit of flashy montage to keep things moving without getting excessive. It's all good and welcome, and doesn't overstay that welcome. - 7/10
34. Superman III (1983) - February 3rd
Whoever said Superman and Buster Keaton go together was misinformed. This is without a doubt one of the strangest movies I've seen this year, and indeed in general. As such, I only really have one question: why? Why did they do... everything the way that they did in this movie. I understand what they were trying to do, using the story as social commentary on America's treatment of unemployment and environmentalism and the like, but the filmmakers chose to do it all in such strange and wholly unnecessary ways. The structure of the story is split in two for seemingly no reason and is ultimately convoluted, with each half having very little to do with one another for most of the movie and employing considerably conflicting tones, neither of which suit this version of Superman, even if they feel like they should, because they each went too extreme in one direction. - 3.5/10
35. Beyond Skyline (2017) - February 4th
The first Skyline was awful, somehow worse than you would expect from the makers of Alien vs. Predator: Requiem, with only a good effects reel to justify an existence that is otherwise almost unwatchable as a movie. When the first is a film as bad as that, it's a wonder this sequel even exists, and it seems like it would take more effort than is necessary to somehow make it worse. (As an aside, it's neat that Frank Grillo is now the lead in two B-movie franchises that were entirely wasted concepts in the first outing that didn't include him. Is Frank Grillo who B-movies need in order to realise their potential?)
When compared to the first, Beyond Skyline is actually decent. As far as gritty sci-fi schlock goes, it's mediocre. The effects work isn't top notch, which, considering the budget, isn't a surprise, but for the sheer amount of it is consistently decent. When they're against real backgrounds it's bad enough to not be convincing, but in environment that are 90% set or effect the design of both the animated effects and the costumes are significantly better by comparison. That said, a lot of the shots get reused and recycled, once again stressing how low the budget for an effects-heavy film this is. In terms of alien design and movement, it's reminiscent of a combination of both the Alien and Predator designs, with a bio-industrial insectoid motif similar to the Aliens and deliberate humanoid actions with weapons similar to the Predator. It's a solid mix, with enough to look at to make it memorable, if nothing else is.
The writing is all over the place in structure, jumping from setting to setting at a breakneck pace with tropes used to abridge story beats so that they can keep focus on the action. The details are a lot of "just because" sci-fi rigmarole used to pretend the story is coherent, but it's now worse than a lot of other high-concept sci-fi. The dialogue is hackneyed, containing some truly terribly implemented exposition to connect this movie with the first one. The acting doesn't make the delivery of any lines better, but it's rarely outright laughable. Overall, this film is decent effects and action with not much else of note, but nothing as offensively terrible as the first film. - 5/10
Re-watches
8. The King's Speech (2010) - January 30th
I decided to re-watch this after hearing someone whose opinion I somewhat respect "mediocre" when discussing it in relation to other Best Picture nominees from the same year. While The Social Network would be my pick from that year, The King's Speech was always a close second. The film may fit one of the templates for Oscar-bait, being a historical drama about older white men overcoming personal trials, but it's done so delightfully well.
This is in large part due to the performances. Both Firth and Rush are absolutely sublime, not only as individuals but in their chemistry; they ebb and flow as comfortably as water, even as they have conversations too clever to be real, sharing each scene as equals, exchanging clever witticisms as old friends, unerring in behaving as the goals of the movies demand. Scenes like their first encounter are a delight to watch, as they feel each other out, speaking quietly, with calmness from Rush contrasting with Firth's discomfort until his anxiety breaks, but not before they each get a chance at a few light self-deprecating jabs. The dialogue is inherently artificial, it's too often too smart for it to be anything else, but the film doesn't try to feel real, it just tries to feel genuine, and the performances sell it, especially together.
In addition to this, the filming techniques used in the film keep the tone consistent and reinforce much of what the writing and acting is trying to accomplish. The camera moves dynamically, shifting this way and that in time to the actors, propelling itself to emphasise their movements at all times. When it's static, the camera always attempts to maintain a sense of constriction and isolation around Firth, never forgetting just what that means to the emotion of the story. It reminds me of Spielberg's more recent work with historical drama, maintaining a heightened sense of tension and drama from the perspective of only a couple of people and their personal torment in the context of a much greater conflict.
This goes for the writing as well. The story structure takes intentional liberties with its inspiration for the sake of greater dramatic points, giving the film a considerably more theatrical tone, in-keeping with the unrealistic but sincere motives of the dialogue and performances. As I said before, the dialogue is mostly clever in a way that's both delightfully entertaining and obviously fictitious in its consistency, not a flaw because it's well-written and the performances always make it convincing, but it gives greater credence to the imaginary nature of the story, true only in its emotion.
I'm glad I re-watched this, because it is as excellent as ever, even as the template it follows becomes more and more familiar to the point of being tiresome. - 8/10
9. Sucker Punch (2011) - February 1st
I watched this once back when it was first released, and didn't enjoy or engage with it at all. Recently, I've come across some discussions about the movie that offer more thoughtful or alternative takes, and intrigued me enough to give it another go.
This time around, I'm impressed with how good the movie looks. It's a little busy and has a few shots that look notably worse than the rest, but for the most part it's really well shot, highly stylised action, the sort you'd expect from Snyder, especially at that period in his career. Lot's of slow-motion, distinct colour palette per action sequence, excessive de-saturation during the action scenes to contrast with the brothel scenes, it's all very deliberate in design. As far as the choreography is concerned, it varies from sequence to sequence. The initial robot samurai fight is really well done, with the size of the creatures making for a strong contrast between the adversaries that also gives a sense of weight to the fight. The steampunk zombie WWI sequence is fairly generic until they get down in the trenches; shootouts are less interesting than melees because of how little character-to-character contact there is, so once the girls get up close and personal the whole thing gets a lot more interesting. Something similar could be said for the other two sequences.
What doesn't suit is the sound editing. The sound levels for the music and effects seem to change at random and don't mesh together at all. Sometimes the music is significantly louder than the action which is in turn significantly louder than the dialogue. It's ultimately unpleasant in the sheer amount of uneven sound and does an unfortunate amount of damage to the action scenes.
Of course, that's just the skin of the movie, and doesn't sink in to the meat of the discussion surrounding the movie, which seems to largely be centred around the themes and messages of the movie and whether or not they make the movie misogynistic.
It's a bit of a wash from what I can see. The movie seeks to use femininity and female sexuality as a form of empowerment, as evidenced by the power Babydoll has over the men she dances for. Considering the fantasy expressed through her dance numbers it's easy to say that the movie succeeds in this; the girls get to do badass action hero stuff and without losing any of their identity as women. At the same time it cares little for its characters beyond their thematic value as aspects of Babydoll; the film seemingly wants these girls to be empowered, but does little to build them beyond shallow archetypes that are in and of themselves just fantasies. The girls aren't who we see them as, they're figments of imagination that are made victims by the mind of someone who is helpless. This is in and of itself the core disagreement I have with readings of this film look at it with a sense of empowerment: it's all through being victimized. This seems defeatist rather than empowering. I don't think the film is trying to be misogynistic; it's the men that are universally portrayed as antagonistic pigs that can only see the women as objects. However, when the film simply doesn't give meaningful characterisation to the girls and only empowers them through fantasy, it's easy to see why someone might read the film that way. Personally, however, I think of it as more tragically pessimistic. It's still a commentary on the sexualisation of women, but it's seemingly suggestive that it will happen either way, so they may as well try and find power in it. The film isn't trying to say that that is a good thing, quite the opposite, but that it is also an inevitable thing.
Things become a bit more clear in intent with the extended cut, when Babydoll is finally offered what she hasn't been for so long: consent. The readings of the film as a meta commentary on certain cultures gain a lot more credence with this scene. Considering this is my first time seeing this particular scene, I can't say much more than that, other than that as a first impression it's a little disconnected from the rest of the movie, but I understand what people are getting at when this scene is taken in to account.
With the re-watch, I don't like the film any more than I did the first time, but I do have a modicum of respect for the fact that it is trying to say something, even if what it says is often lost in the fact that it behaves exactly as what it's trying to be a commentary on, ultimately seeming to have conflicting messages. As a last point, what bothered me most is the top layer; it ultimately only reinforces themes expressed in the middle layer while offering conflicting structure and answers to thematic questions. I'd be curious to see what this film would be without the asylum as a backdrop. - 5/10
10. Iron Man 3 (2010) - February 2nd
I'll be honest, this was chosen because I needed to watch a movie that I could watch without engaging with and still have an enjoyable time. At the same time, I can never quite switch off entirely.
In the sea of superhero movies that have come out over the last decade that range in quality from pretty bad to surprisingly very good, Iron Man 3 always stood out to me as one of the better ones. This is in large part due to the work put in to the continued development of Tony Stark as a character, including some of his most significant personal moments. The greatest of these was at the scene of the attack on his house. The moment the missile hits, Tony activates the suit - to protect Pepper. One of Tony's initial defining traits was his selfishness, a factor about him that's so innate that even as he changes over the course of the series his only way of expressing selfless ideas is through selfish actions; he keeps Pepper in the dark about his imminent death in Iron Man 2 because he doesn't want to hurt her, he activates Ultron because he wants to protect the whole world and keep his friends safe, he signs the Sokovia Accords because he wants to do what he thinks is right for everyone else. The only way he knows how to think about others is in relation to how he can be the one to solve their problems. This moment in Iron Man 3 is the purest example of this, but because of its purity is also one of the most important moments for his character, essentially highlighting within a few seconds everything you really need to know about him to know how he'll behave; it shows that he cares deeply about those closest to him and will do anything to protect them, particularly Pepper, but that it has to be he who protects them. Additionally, it shows one more time a fact about his character that has been true since the final moment of the first film: "I am Iron Man". It is this moment that acts as a microcosm of the greater work put in to developing Tony and his complicated relationship with the suit as a central focus of the movie, and that it is also unhealthy and pathological, given that the reason the scene happens in the first place is because of Tony's recklessness and over-reliance on the suit.
That's all that I have to say for the movie for now. It has some minor issues that I could get in to, such as a drawn out third act, but nothing substantial. Also, personally I have a more positive view towards the Mandarin twist (at least the first twist). Overall, this tries to be more involved with its characters than the average superhero movie up to that point, and its dialogue is better than just about all the others of its kind. - 7.5/10
Published February 4th, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment