The Eternals (2021) Review

Title: The Eternals
Year: 2021

Director: Chloe Zhao
Country: US
Language: English

When I saw the North American premiere of Chloe Zhao's Nomadland at Toronto International Film Festival 2020 I knew we had a new masterful filmmaker in the world of cinema. I told everybody I came across that Nomadland would win Best Picture at the Academy Awards, and many months later my prediction came true.  She was so impressive that Disney decided to hire her for their epic film The Eternals. This was an outstanding feature as well. 

An unexpected tragedy forces the Eternals, ancient aliens who have been living on Earth in secret for thousands of years, out of the shadows to reunite against mankind's most ancient enemy, the Deviants.

In terns of representation, The Eternals delivers. Chloe Zhao made a film that represents women, poc & disabled people in a way that isn't demeaning or preachy. MCU has had trouble in the past with this;  the recent Shang Chi had an oddly racist joke about how bad Asian women drivers are perceived to be. I specifically loved the deaf character, Makkari (Lauden Ridloff), as her disability isn't made a plot point or "weakness" or "strength" (like Forrest Gump) or tie into her character at all, it's just part of her. I also love that the other characters adjust to her & she isn't made to compensate for them. This is refreshing to see in a big budget movie. 

The story is epic in scope, complimented by a remarkable score by Ramin Djawadi. The cinematography is often breathtaking; Chloe Zhao's masterful eye for cinematography means we get to see beautiful on-location landscapes that are often full of lush forests & foreboding mountains. This is a welcome change compared to Marvel's typical CGI soundstages. The Eternals' pacing is far slower than the typical MCU flick & this not only allows for such a rich story to unfold, but also for the characters to breathe & develop, 

The Eternals is not well liked among critics and MCU fans at this moment, likely because its style, tone and pacing is very different from the typical superhero flick. I see things differently & consider this to be the best Marvel picture I've seen so far. I absolutely love the director and I hope to see more of her films in the future. 

Noirvember #1: Night and the City (1950)

Title: Night and the City
Year: 1950
Director: Jules Dassin
Country: UK
Language: English

Director Jules Dassin knew he was about to be blacklisted in Hollywood due to the House of Un-American Activities Committee anti-communist witch hunts at the time, so he fled to London, where he made Night and the City (1950) for Twentieth Century Fox. I first saw this film 11 years ago for Michael Boyce's International Cinema class and I'm revisiting it now due to the commencement of Noirvember. Is the film as good as I remember it? 

A small-time grifter  and nightclub tout named Harry Fabian (Richard Widmark)  takes advantage of some fortuitous circumstances and tries to become a big-time player as a wrestling promoter.

Fabian, played as a slime ball by Widmark, is the classic film noir character; a tragic antihero that is doomed from the outset, driven by an ever increasing desire to get ahead in life. Dassin’s cinematographer Max Greene emphasizes the character's increasingly hopeless situation by shooting in claustrophobic dive bars & inescapable alleyways. 

Night and the City transforms a familiar London setting into an unseemly environment that perpetuates an atmosphere of dread. It's a sordid, alternate backdrop that easily reminds one of another great noir in The Third Man. Dassin's use of shadow and documentary-like realism made admirers of even his harshest critics. Love the story or not, one cannot deny its technical merit. 

Dassin's masterpiece is a film that improves with every viewing. Night and the City is a substantial creative achievement that deserves to be studied in every University that has a film studies major. 

Last Night in Soho (2021) Review

Title: Last Night in Soho
Year: 2021
Director: Edgar Wright 
Country: UK
Language: English

Edgar Wright is one of the most enjoyable directors to watch in regards to filmography. 2/3rds of the Cornetto Trilogy (Hot Fuzz & Shaun of the Dead)  are hilarious genre films. Scott Pilgrim vs. The World is an awesome gamer flick & Baby Driver is a fun crime picture.  Last Night in Soho is his 6th venture and it is quite impressive. 

In this feature, an aspiring fashion designer (Thomasin Mackenzie) , is mysteriously able to enter the 1960s where she encounters a dazzling wannabe singer, Sandie. But the glamour is not all it appears to be and the dreams of the past start to crack and splinter into something far darker.

Last Night in Soho (2021) is a great psychological horror that reminds me of other great films; Vertigo (1958), Midnight in Paris (2011), Black Swan (2010) and even Psycho (1960) The aesthetics feel as if Alfred Hitchocock and Dario Argentino made a baby. The use of color and cinematography make every frame pop with euphoria; the dreamlike editing of the film gives the picture an atmosphere of dread. 

Last Night in Soho has many twists and turns; you think it's going the route of Black Swan, but then it becomes an Agathe Christie novel, and then transforms into something else entirely. The film serves as a good reminder to not idolize the past, as the past can be haunting, but it also aims full tilt towards #metoo feminism ("that a really nice name") . Wright has made me feel like a really creepy dude & has me rethinking how I approach women. 

Many reviewers complain about Last Night in Soho being too "over the top", and while I agree with that sentiment, I think its chaotic nature makes it incredibly enjoyable. If I wanted a lame by the numbers, play it safe horror movie I'd see Halloween Kills. Soho really left an impression on me. 

Movies I Despise: Inception (2010)

Title: Movies I Despise
Film: Inception
Year: 2010
Director: Christopher Nolan 

Back a decade ago, in 2010, Inception was touted as a "masterpiece" by nearly every filmgoer, including your grandmother. It was a critically acclaimed, commercially successful venture by the rare auteur Hollywood director Christopher Nolan. Many aspects of the film, especially the booming score by Hans Zimmer, have etched their way into a wide variety of Blockbusters throughout the decade. I know film professors who teach this very film to their students. To say that this picture is not good is film snob blasphemy; but I will try. 

 Inception is about a thief  (Leonardo DiCaprio) who steals corporate secrets through the use of dream-sharing technology is given the inverse task of planting an idea into the mind of a C.E.O.

The plot of Inception couldn't work in real-life & therefore the characters need to give exposition in order to sell the audiences' on the plot devices' believability. For Inception to work you can't be spending too much time thinking "this doesn't make sense!".  There are many movies, like Ghostbusters & Back to the Future, that have to explain their technology. They do so in very compact & digestible ways ("The Libyans!").  Inception spends too much time rambling on about what is happening & why it is happening. "This is happening because of this!" Ok, I get it, it's a dream you don't have to tell me aga- "This will happen because of this!".  Entire characters exist just to serve as plot narration. Can anybody tell me what purpose Elliot Page's character serves aside from exposition? Imagine Ghostbusters, but every 5 minutes the characters explained what a ghost was. 

This constant need for exposition is bad because 90% of the movie is in a dream (or in a dream within a dream). There is no such thing as "dream logic". Dreams can't and shouldn't be be explained. I do not need to be told why the characters are experiencing x,y,z because you can easily get away with "it's a dream". See Richard Linklater's Waking Life for a beautiful film about dreaming. See Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo for a brief creative dream sequence. Inception could have thrown anything at us and instead gave us the most creatively bankrupt ideas for what a dream could be visually represented onscreen. I get why it didn't go all out, you don't want your audiences confused, but Inception's visual style was nearly identical to a James Bond movie. Didn't Goldeneye also have a ski fight scene? 

As Inception concluded with a cliffhanger ending that film snobs will analyze to death on Youtube, I wasn't left with a sense of awe, but rather a sense of frustration and boredom. How could a film with such a creative and intriguing premise be reduced to a B-level action movie? 

Dune (1984) Review

Title: Dune
Year: 1984
Director: David Lynch
Country: US
Language: English

In 2021 Dennis Villeneuve directed Frank Herbert's Dune to critical and (hopefully) commercial success. I recently watched it in the theatre and was impressed by the epic feel of its immense cinematography and booming score by Hans Zimmer. The first onscreen adaptation, not including Alejandro Jodorowsky's attempt, was David Lynch's Dune. Considered "unfilmable" due to the complexity of its plot, Lynch's adaptation missed the mark with audiences and did not perform well with critics either. 

In this, a Duke's son (Kyle MacLachlan) leads desert warriors against the galactic emperor and his father's evil nemesis to free their desert world from the emperor's rule.

Fresh from the success of The Elephant Man, Lynch had free reign to work on any project he wished, including Return of the Jedi, which he turned down. . Producer Dino de Laurentiis convinced him to work on Dune, which ended up causing a class between studios and Lynch's strange style of film-making.  Lynch, with only two films to his name at the time, couldn't resist signing with a major studio and ended up spending a regrettable 3 years on this picture. 

Unlike the 2021 adaptation, it isn't clear if Lynch had any real passion for the source material as the story bounces all over the place, plot points are left hanging, and characters have no real development. I felt very disoriented by a picture that felt far from epic. Paul, who Lynch attempts to give a messianic aura to, feels bland and uninteresting. The special effects, like many sci-fi from the 80's, are extremely dated. If the CGI was not bad then, it sure is now!

It is quite refreshing that we have a true adaptation of Frank Herbert's material in Villeneuve's Dune. David Lynch is a remarkable director- when he is given free reign on his own material. It is unlikely this book could have been adapted by ANY director prior to the 2010's. Even Steven Spielberg was smart enough not to touch this "unfilmable" piece of literature. 

0 Stars

Dune (2021) Review

Title: Dune
Year: 2021
Director: Dennis Villenueve 
Country: US
Language: English

In 1965 Author Frank Herbert published Dune as two separate series in Analog magazine. It was tied for the Hugo Award & won the Nebula Award for best novel in 1966. Nearly half a century later it would be cited as the best selling science fiction novel of all time. In 1984, after his commercial and critical success The Elephant Man, David Lynch would adapt it into a fairly memorable yet displeasing to critics film adaptation of Dune. In 2021 Dennis Villeneuve would be the second person to dip his hand into adapting the material for screen. That is the version we will be reviewing today. 

Dune tells the story of Paul Atreides (Timothee Chamalet), a brilliant and gifted young man born into a great destiny beyond his understanding, must travel to the most dangerous planet in the universe to ensure the future of his family and his people.

In the past decade (2011-2021) due to the advancement of CGI, there are many movies that are touted as epic, but don't feel epic (Avengers: Endgame, Star Wars)  In my subjective opinion, Dune is the first film that actually feels epic in quite a while. It is immense! Filled to the brim with gorgeous cinematography, remarkable set design, rich story, intriguing character development.  and a powerful Oscar worthy soundtrack by Hans Zimmer. Villeneuve's Dune is this generation's Lord of the Rings. 

Ambitious and fairly complex, Dune celebrates Herbert's book by being more faithful to the story than Lynch's take. It is quite clear that Villeneuve understood the subject matter at hand & went out of his way to make the picture a satisfying experience. Well, perhaps I should replace that word "satisfying", the film starts the titles "part one" so going in you know this film will not conclude its story. This can be frustrating as it is a 2hr 35 min movie (with trailers it was more like 3hrs in the theatre). I did feel similar to another epic Lawrence of Arabia that the film was too long. By the 2hr mark I felt like Dune had told its story well enough, it didn't need "extra". 

Lawrence of Arabia is a cinema classic, as are other epics I feel are too long like Ben Hur & Gone With the Wind, so perhaps it's just my patience for films end at the 2hr mark. I was quite flabbergasted when my cousin suggested that the film was too short. While Dune is quite a feat, it is incomplete, and thus expectations are quite high for the sequel. I sure hope Villeneuve gives this story a conclusion that this first half deserves. 

Vengeance is Mine: All Other Pay Cash (2021) Review

Title: Vengeance is Mine
Year: 2020
Director: Edwin
Country: Thailand
Language: Thai

Masculinity is really frail when you analyze it under a microscope. Much of what "being a man" means is held up by norms and traditions that don't really make much sense and/or are incredibly dated. Those who think they are "alpha males" are usually just those who stick to these strict, ridiculous standards and put down those who are different from an perceived "norm". Alas, Vengeance is Mine is a good window into toxic masculinity. 

In a society ruled by machismo, a hibernating "bird" (boner)  becomes a serious matter. In a life of brutality, the sleeping bird is an allegory for a peaceful and serene life, even when the whole world tries desperately to rouse it.

Erectile disfunction is the theme of Vengeance is Mine. Our main character is struggling to accept his difficulty and often reacts about the news in violent ways in order to prove that he is a "man". When most movies talk about boners they tend to be coy, this film doesn't beat around the bush and is both hilarious and heartfelt because of it. The film frames societies obsession with getting/maintaining an erection as part of toxic masculinity. 

Faith Akin provides impressive choreography to the fight sequences that mimic 80's action movies, similar to the style of John Woo. Genre elements and stylized action work very well to entertain the viewer, but some side plots prove to be extremely boring and distract from the main theme. It feels like the writers were a little too ambitious and wanted to be about more things, but Edwin should have known better, cut the side stories and made the film 30-40 minutes shorter. 

Vengeance is Mine is a fun film that will have audiences talking about how brash and over-the-top the language and action scenes were. It's quite a weird picture that I doubt would ever get funding in the West. Southeast Asian films are hidden gems of World Cinema. 

What If? (2021) Review

Title: What if?
Year: 2021
Country: US
Language: English 

What if? was originally a comic book anthology that originally ran from 1977-1984. The purpose was to show readers an alternate Universe where key moments in Marvel & World history had not occurred as they normally did. Such comics included What if Iron Man was a Traitor? and What if Spiderman joined the Fantastic Four? Disney adapted the series into a television show that streamed on Disney+ in 2021. 

What If? tells the story of the Marvel Multiverse wherein are a seemingly infinite amount of alternate timelines that often have small and/or large key differences compared to the  official MCU films.

The most striking feature of What If? is the cel-shaded animation style that gives the onscreen images a unique pop. As a result, the 3D CGI looks very much like 2D animation. The technique is usually reserved for video games, but for this show it gives a comic book aesthetic. As a result MCU's character's transitions from live action to animation doesn't feel too jarring. The characters still feel like living breathing people. 

The episodes in this series, of which there are 8 of, are very hit and miss for me. I loved What If Dr. Strange Lost his Heart? as it was filled with emotion and depth. I disliked What if Thor was an Only Child? because it was pretty boring and felt like meaningless filler.  While some of the show is popcorn entertainment, I do love that they are not afraid to get extremely depressing. The What if Ultron Won? episode is especially brutal. 

While What If? is (subjectively) hit and miss with its stories, I can't deny that it is extremely well made and will appeal to a wide variety of audiences. I would enjoy more seasons of this bizarre, campy, funny romp  that has the ability to show a tremendous amount of heart. 

Falcon & The Winter Solder (2021) Review

Title: Falcon & The Winter Soldier
Year: 2021
Country: US
Language: English

The First Avenger, The Winter Soldier and Civil War were not only great Captain America ventures, they are my favorite films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe thus far. I love that they are filled to the brim with spies, espionage and legitimately thrilling moments. I feel like Captain America has become a far more compelling character than any other Avenger. That saying his finale at Endgame was bittersweet; I wish we got more Captain America, but I am excited to see what Falcon will do with his shield. 

Following the events of Avengers: Endgame, Sam Wilson/Falcon (Anthony Mackie) and Bucky Barnes/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan)  team up in a global adventure that tests their abilities -- and their patience. 

Even if you're a Universe saving Avenger you'll still face discrimination if you're black. Sam Wilson gets stopped by police, denied a home loan, and passed up as the next Captain America for a blonde haired blue eyed white guy. Falcon & The Winter Soldier is very critical of the institutions in America that hold POC down & examines how deep rooted these problems are.

Although at the same time, the protagonists are also disenfranchised people who are misplaced because of a post-snap inept government. Karli Morgenthau (Erin Kellyman) is a teenager who leads the rebellious "Flag Smashers" group. Her methods can be cruel, but the writers fail to make her an intriguing villain, or even somebody in a morally grey area. I find myself sympathizing with her and wondering what Sam Wilson's problem is. The show wants me to see Wilson as an appropriate replacement for Steve Rogers, but Rogers wasn't such a government stooge (see: Civil War) . 

Also, per my Loki complaint, every episode needs a big fight whether its warranted or not. Marvel seems to think its' audiences attention span is non existent. I would have liked this show to slow down a little. Overall the show is a decent watch, a little too on the nose with political commentary (His shield is stained!), but worth a viewing. 

Should race, gender & sexuality be "historically accurate" in television & film?

Race, Gender, Sexuality & "Historical Accuracy"
Michael J. Carlisle
Unedited Essay/Rant

 Recently I have viewed a number of social media posts about Bridgerton , Netflix's new show about about the powerful Bridgerton family of Regency-era England. The controversy is that it is not historically accurate because characters that should be white are played by POC (people of color). After-all, if it's racist to portray Scarlett Johansson as asian in the live action Ghost in the Shell, then it should be wrong for any race to play something that is traditionally not their race. Reverse racism!

What side do the scales fall on again? How many decades have minorities had to deal with their culture being mocked? The main image of Jesus we see is it as a white man, even though it would be more "historically accurate" for him to have a darker complexion. Is the history we are taught in school actually "accurate"? Every American is taught that Columbus "discovered" America, even though a vast amount of indigenous cultures were here long ago & Columbus was more of a colonizing masochist than any real hero. 

There are letters upon letters of men writing love notes to each other in WW1 & WWII, but we are taught they were "just good friends!".  We are taught Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake for heresy, but we aren't taught that the "heresy" in question was for wearing men's clothing. She could have been trans, but we tend to ignore that when reviewing her life. 

I believe that "History" as we know it is fluid and constantly evolving. We will forever have an incomplete picture that will change the more information we have access to & it is partially shaped by our attitudes and understanding of our world at the time.  The history we have access to also depends on who is in power & what policies are in place. 

When people say they want "historical accuracy" it really means they want the history they perceive to be accurate. In the West "historical accuracy" is history from the white male colonizer's point of view. See every Western ever made and you'll notice that none of them portray events from the indigenous perspective. Adding women, poc or lgbtt people as main characters instead is seen as "woke", "liberal", "pc", "leftist" (insert buzzword) 

Quite frankly visual art (movies, tv shows) shouldn't be constricted to any notion of "historical accuracy". That ship sailed long ago with Amadeus, Braveheart and *gasp* are you telling me The Sound of Music really didn't happen that way? I think an audience is smart enough to understand that Thomas Jefferson in the hit Broadway musical Hamilton wasn't actually black. The themes, subtext, visual language & message of the show should be on your mind more than trivial differences between stage and reality. 

POC deserve to see themselves in any role they please. Generations of black people had to view their race in film as slaves or servants or portrayed as literal Jim Crows from Dumbo.  They should be able to view themselves as kings, heroes, queens, scientists, doctors etc. even if that wasn't actually possible in that time, at that place. The audience is smart enough to get past race & see the bigger picture.

Even when it comes to fictional characters, like James Bond ("based" on a real person does not count as "historical") people have a stick up their butt about how they should be portrayed. In No Time to Die the actor is still portrayed by a middle aged white guy, but because he's more sensitive it isn't TrUE to ThE cHarActEr and obviously made for cuck libs. We've had the same character do the same schtick for 29 movies, over a period of 50+ years. At what point are we allowed to move on? At what point does the Franchise become stale because "it must be this way!". 

LGBT people have been, and still are,  underrepresented in cinema despite there being a significant presence of lgbt actors throughout the history of Hollywood like Cary Grant, James Stewart & Greta Garbo. If movies can pretend there are more straight people than there actually are irl, then why can't we pretend there are more gay people? Cinema often demands we suspend our disbelief for far more dramatic events. If I can believe in plausibility of  The Hulk in The Avengers, then surely a gay Hulk is not much of a leap in reality. 

I hope this messy, unedited rant of an essay was comprehensible. I just despise when people try to force art to maintain the boundaries of their limited worldview. We should keep art accessible for everyone & part of that is stepping away from colonialist tradition and transforming characters into people that a wide variety of people can see themselves as. If white cis people complain that they want to "see themselves" too...they have nearly a century where they dominated television & film. The majority of films still are being made to cater to them.