4v291o
That’s it
i wonder if Thel likes Wes Anderson’s new “what if synchronized sound was invented a decade later” alt aesthetic history film about capital as a sure path to perdition and futile one to salvation…….
]]>Well make it stick this time
uncharacteristically expressive work for Huston; there’s an alarming compositional fluidity here that imbues a conceptually familiar, stage-like set-up with a degree of anxiety and at times abject horror all but totally alien to this kind of work. did not think i’d see the day Robinson outshine Bogey and Becall
]]>pisses your pants
keep seeing this framed as like the feel-bad movie of the year but i had a blast with this, go with a group and every moment becomes way too silly to land
]]>i’m with my zoey rn atm
]]>occurred to me about five minutes in that prolific Family Guy watcher Zoey was going to instantly recognize the motel speech
]]>Maybe it’s not as bad as it looks
feature length adaptation of The Rehearsal Season 2
]]>You may choose to live in the entity’s world, gentlemen, but I will not.
First act is a disaster interpolated by a handful of really affecting moments, and even once it gets going it’s still impeded by an excess of lore reverence, but this builds off the promising formal language of its predecessor enough for me to stay engaged, and it features some of the franchise’s most remarkable sequences. Also I was seated next to a half dozen old ladies who earnestly and enthusiastically “Ooo”’d and “Oh”’d and “Ah”’d at every major beat and I was kikiing right there next to them.
]]>This is a “no-Marvel spoilers” garage, ok? I like to go in fresh. I’m dead serious.
]]>full star off for featuring the SSpace Needle in a major set piece, my Torontonian pride prevents me from endorsing anything with that fraud in it.
Pakula crafts some remarkable images here but he can’t really attach any weight to them beyond their most transparent iconographic function. This is a far pulpier, more spectacular venture than most of its generic contemporaries, and operates with a clearer satirical edge than Pakula’s other 70s efforts, treating the question of “Where do these nutjobs come from?” with the utmost austerity. It honestly feels like a closer cousin to The Boys From Brazil than Klute, and I’m not sure that’s to its advantage. I’m not inherently opposed to political thrillers which jettison salient politics and narrative clarity in favour of perpetual obfuscation and reliance on the distortion of nationalist iconography to convey their ideas imagistically (I mean I love Blow Out), but this feels too thin to function. Like the first 45 minutes of this are devoted to a conspiracy wherein the witnesses to an assassination are systematically being themselves covertly assassinated because they may have seen something on the day of the shooting which connects back to Parallax, but then this plot line is swiftly abandoned, and provided with only the haziest justification. Aside from Pakula’s reliable craftsmanship and Beatty’s charm (and the remarkable test montage), there just isn’t enough here that leaves an impression.
]]>That’s called the first draft of history. It’s going to hold.
one part reflective epitaph on Blow Out’ status at the End of History, one part filtering of Wise’s The Set-Up through the densely imagistic constructions which De Palma had so refined by the end of his 90s run (filtered of course through a Vertigo lens, as always). would unquestionably number among my all-time favourites if it wasn’t really really obvious that the climax was just completely cut last second. still very very close
]]>beautiful gowns. i like that neither this poster nor this backdrop actually happen in the movie
]]>[Director’s Cut] [In Theaters] [4K]
ok this third viewing did illuminate for me just how thin Bloom’s character is even beyond the fact that he’s pretty bad in the part. certainly a more capable actor could’ve imbued the character with greater depth but Balian’s function as a foil to everyone else in a given scene would still feel kind of sloppily pragmatic if Nicolaj Coster-Waldau had the lead role instead. that said, it also illuminated how remarkable absolutely everything else about this is. inches ever closer to being an all-time favourite on each viewing. seeing it in theaters was unforgettable.
]]>always jarring how different this is than the sequels it spawned. this first one feels like the pinnacle of a kind of Redbox Action subgenre, before the series carved out its own generic categorization in Chapter 2. I yearn to see what future films could’ve done with Willem once they started embracing having actual characters
]]>more relevant today than it was in 99 thanks to the freaking Cheeto in Chief! Bravo vince
]]>I’m not here for you
]]>And now, young Skywalker….. you will die
was always my favourite of the saga as a kid, then for the last little while has been probably my least favourite of the originals…… now it’s maybe my favourite again? very obviously flawed film; han and leia have next to nothing going on dramatically, it functionally doesn’t have a second act, it plays with some imagery early on that it isn’t prepared to reckon with, and the sister thing is embarrassing, an obvious holdover from a scrapped storyline used to flatten the character dynamics, and spark dull, cheap conflict without ever manifesting any meaningful narrative justification. but this also the series indulging in its best instincts, all but unfettered by budgetary constraints. this is a miracle of compositing; actors and puppets weave seamlessly in and out of matte paintings in layer upon layer of richly complex images. the final battle in the stars above Endor (and on the moon’s surface!), for as conceptually repetitive as it is, is still probably the franchise at its most spectacularly propulsive. but god, the central spiritual conflict here…. it’s not exactly complicated, but it still feels like some of the most viscerally moving material to come from pulp of this scale. i could watch hamil, prowse and jones, and mcdiarmid (especially!! godddddd…… unforgettable performance) just inhabit that set for hours.
]]>Anything I can do to bring you back to the world I’m in?
im a robert wise ride-or-die but this is an evil movie lol. functions chiefly to rehabilitate european bourgeois aesthetics and structures by positioning nazism as a foreign imposition on the purity of european gentile pastoralism (or again, aesthetic pastoralism, since the Von Trapp bourgeois nobility is the centerpiece of every frame not set in the mountains). the image of a gentile, aesthetically “aryan” family needing sanctuary from the gestapo because they’re being persecuted for honoring the glory of the Austro-Hungarian Empire feels genuinely ghoulish (this notably did not happen to the real von trapp family, who i ittedly just now learned existed). also i can’t stand hammerstein’s lyrics (love rogers’s compositions though) and i think wise is uncharacteristically lost behind the camera here. there’s a real struggle to compose what is textually a sentimentalist domestic drama as a sweeping 60’s spectacle. wise’s normally extraordinarily considered ultra wide 2.20:1 compositions feel completely misapplied to the material, resulting in nearly every shot either inappropriately cutting off too much of a character, having far too little headspace, or having far too much negative space.
anyways, it’s hard to any of that whenever andrews or plummer are in frame, which, fortunately, is nearly the entire runtime.
]]>If you dance for me, you may ask of me whatever you wish and I will give it to thee
]]>got halfway through this other night, but found myself too tired to continue. normally I'd just pause and finish the next day, but interpolating my viewing like that struck me as totally at odds with the film's structure, so I elected instead to start from the beginning. going back through the first half, Akerman's exploration of the public sphere, of barely-lit doorways, all-but-empty cafes, and the universal escape offered by The Night, granted me the perspective to consider new counters to the relationships in each vignettes, and appreciate how each sliver of Akerman's portrait of Brussels after hours contributes holistically to the work. As I ventured on into unseen territory, however Akerman's camera retreated into the familiar recesses of the domestic, as the night grew darker and the hearts of those within frame fell cold. Despite this sudden turn from melancholy into malady, the sudden cut to the early morning which marks the final act still feels violent; the promise of the eternal night, of one last reconciliation between lovers just before the dawn, is stripped away
]]>jon bernthal’s character is credited as The Bear
]]>zoey had to pause for like two minutes while i laughed at the realistic depiction of a panic attack scene
]]>We’re not to blame
spent most of my 4th (full) viewing thinking about aestheticization, and whether the film’s deconstruction of it absolves it of indulging in it, neo-constructivism, a depiction of entropy as engendered and cultivated by authority, rather than brought to heel by it, the fostering of feudal gender dynamics through global capital (or vice versa) Miller’s vision of a “mechanization of man” completely divorced from its reactionary futurist roots, but my viewing was so dised and interpolated that by the time i reached the end of it, 12 hours after it began, all i could think about was how tom hardy manages to miraculously be the baldest person in the film
]]>I hated those men, but the words still bring me comfort
loved this. formally brazen in a way mass art of this scale hasn’t been (outside of George Miller) in years, while deftly walking the line between a densely tactile period drama with pulpy cathartic set pieces. i think once the film settles into its From Dusk Till Dawn structure, a lot of that dramaturgical specificity is lost, but it does give Coogler the opportunity to reckon with his really rich take on vampirism as the allure of cultural subsumation as an escape from apartheid. looks gorgeous, though the two shots with both Jordans tend to look a little weird; Covenant still unmatched
]]>marvelously inventive but the salience and power of each successive image sort of fades with how endlessly flashy the whole thing is by necessity of its form. commendable work but i can’t see it lingering with me as much more than a (remarkable!) aesthetic exercise
]]>Do you want coffee or a kiss?
Everything
]]>i ire polley’s commitment to the abstraction of her two subjects, both in the piecing together of a series of contradictory images of her late mother (which become further obfuscated by the blending of actual footage of her with recreations designed to mimic the aesthetic of that footage) and in her own role as both the unseen artist behind the piece and the often referred to but never platformed figure at the center of the narrative, but i see a lot of the same issues which would go on to disastrously plague her next film, Women Talking, rearing their heads here. Stories We Tell isn’t nearly as moralistic in its didacticism as that film is, but it’s equally devoted to bluntly expositing the film’s central questions, exposing a fatal cavity of confidence in the ability of polley’s images to pose those questions and convey those ideas on their own merits. the rare moments polley does allow a beat to breathe without further dictation of its significance to the audience are genuinely evocative, but they’re far too few and far between in a film whose final half hour becomes almost solely devoted to justifying itself.
]]>The world does not bend to sentimental tales
]]>always go into this one hoping it’ll fully click for me and it never does. endlessly charming, but i can’t ever shake thinking its status as a Really Good Movie is conditional on it being very much For Kids, which isn’t really a factor in its two sequels.
]]>clinging to my girlfriend in the theater during the Llorando scene………. sort of what life’s all about
]]>still lean towards the Blatty cut, even with its goody pazuzu faces, but i found myself really drawn into the starkness of Friedkin’s version this time around. love that there’s a sort of parallel thematic framework with The Seventh Seal here, finding divinity through sacrifice divorced from piety
]]>you would not believe the kinds of locales this movie tries to convince you are siberia
]]>literally nothing in the world better than when i can tell zoey loves something i show it
]]>I like to things my own way
]]>….And today’s slippin away
]]>found myself really latching onto how heavily sports hang over the conversation here on this watch. the lone topics of conversation beyond the case itself are work and sports — the imagined foundations of a middle class American way of life. no blunt parallel is drawn between the case and the games which still linger so clearly in the minds of the jurors, but there’s an unmistakable kinship between how the two are discussed. it’s easy, and tempting, to write 12 Angry Men off as an overly-designed script too enamored by the sanctity of American institutions to bear much significance, but i find myself increasingly convinced there’s a far greater awareness here of the troubling tensions of how audiences engage with this kind of material; that the western mind can only invest in concepts like “truth” or “justice” when they’re rendered in spectacle.
]]>i looked at ONE review for oomf and saw he already made the joke i was gonna open this with…….
paperback garbage but de palma has a lot of fun playing around in that nebulous “late style” space. really interesting that he pushes the melodramatic absurdity of the plot beyond any of his previous thrillers while also giving rapace and mcadams a bizarre amount of space to emotionally inhabit these ridiculous characters. also apparently there’s a THIRD paul anderson. when will congress step in?
]]>Would you kill for me?
no idea what was happening narratively but this really clicked for me otherwise. far from the first to draw comparisons between this and The Killer, but it really does feel like there’s a kinship here beyond just the shared lead. where Fincher’s film is diligently focused on the minutia of labour, the espionage operation the characters here are involved with is purposely nondescript, operating purely as a backdrop for Soderbergh to indulge in the contradiction of adhering to entrenched modes of human connection in a world increasingly hostile to them. “indulgence” really is the word here, since Soderbergh avoids coming up with a clean answer. George and Kathryn don’t break the systems which erode their capacity to trust and express, but those systems don’t break them either; all they can do is try to make it work.
]]>16 mm print
first time i saw this in theaters back in 2023 was a little underwhelming — a bog standard, no frills afternoon rep screening that I wasn’t really able to devote my full attention to, despite being one of my very favourite films (i had to rush across town to meet somme friends for a Vampyr showing immediately after). seeing the film on a worn, slightly faded print like this, by comparison, felt genuinely once in a lifetime, like i was getting a glimpse into a world and time long since closed off. plus my zoey was there. five stars.
]]>pre-gaming for a Bride showing tonight…. doing my makeup while watch Frankenstein with my gf…….. life doesn’t get better
]]>634 blowjobs in five days
very unflattering point of comparison as a public health-centered legal drama relative to the previous year’s The Insider (the case itself is far too clean to be dramatically compelling, hence why it’s pretty much never the central focus of a given scene), but the self-actualization story works remarkably well (even if I think Roberts is channeling Gena Davis for a lot of it).
]]>He would’ve made a wonderful man
]]>not a super easy film to write about after like 5 straight months of barely watching anything but yeah — my relationship with the medium feels fundamentally changed
]]>How else was I supposed to find any respectable work?
]]>real scattershot, and it paints with a broad brush but i libbed tf out, sorry! really just couldn’t really disconnect from the film’s tonal wavelength, and i’m too fond of Bong’s formal sensibilities and the cast to let the often pretty jarring text of the film trip it up too much. it does hurt me to imagine a much better version of this without mark ruffalo tho
]]>feel a little bad rating this since by no metric did i give it my undivided attention. seemed mildly homophobic but i had a lot of fun
]]>my heart is set to rot
sin-eaters for the patriarchal ideal of desirability as the defining trait of womanhood; one sister acts as an embodying martyr for this principle, while the other languishes as a foil, made to exist as an othered entity, perpetually in proximity to the desirability she’s made to believe would save her. neither is spared from the inevitable violence of the cultural forces they’re forced to define themselves by.
]]>And for a long time you wouldn’t feel anything. And then you’d burst into fire. Forever. And the angels wouldn’t help you. Cause they’ve all gone away
]]>needle in the hay scene’s always devastated me as a self-harmer, but having now also shaved my head in the middle of a self-destructive breakdown…. really glad i wasn’t watching this alone
]]>Maybe the risk is worth the reward
sleeper pick for most cutting detail is Ingrid casting a Black woman to play herself
]]>We only care about the good times
]]>...plus 50 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 26 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 3 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>*Shown before American Gigolo*
...plus 27 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 1 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 31 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 3 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>Criteria for what year I consider a film to have released in varies contextually, generally going off of American release date
...plus 96 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>By decade
1920s — 8
1930s — 2
1940s — 6
1950s — 5
1960s — 17
1970s — 16
1980s — 12
1990s — 13
2000s — 9
2010s — 8
2020s — 4
Directors with multiple entries:
5 — Ingmar Bergman
4 — Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch, Martin Scorsese, Ridley Scott, Lana Wachowski
3 — Chantal Akerman, Jean Cocteau, Akira Kurosawa, Brian De Palma, Lily Wachowski
2 — Joel and Ethan Coen, Francis Ford Coppola, Peter Jackson, Masaki Kobayashi, Fritz Lang, David Lean, Spike Lee, Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, Jacques Rivette, Andrei Tarkovsky, Hiroshi Teshigahara, Agnes Varda, James Whale
...plus 90 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 6 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 2 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 41 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 19 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>2023
2024
2025
...plus 3 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 34 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 15 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 40 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 4 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 44 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 5 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 8 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>done ✅
...plus 73 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 70 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 52 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 35 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 1 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>Spider-Man Lotus in 15th place
...plus 4 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>I’ve wasted so much money
Gotten to it at another showing
Gotten to it at another showing
Gotten to it at another showing
This has happened twice lol
Gotten to it at another showing
...plus 13 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>see notes if using as a watchlist
...plus 52 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 12 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 8 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>...plus 15 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.
]]>