Directed By: Pablo Larrain Written By: Pablo Larrain, Giillermo Calderon and Alejandro Moreno Cinematography: Sergio Armstrong Editor: Sebastian Sepulveda
Cast: Mariana Di Girolamo, Gael Garcia Bernal, Santiago Cabrera, Paola Giannini, Cristian Suarez, Giannina Fruttero
A couple deals with the aftermath of an adoption that goes awry as their household falls apart.
Watching this film is more of an experience. the base there always seems to be a running rhythm or one that the film as well as its Characters seem to be running On.
How a beat builds, how it takes many different elements put together to make not only A song but even a bear which is the Love force the heartbeat of the entity known as music. The same can be said of life, art and That is how this film Works
At first, it seems like the main character is acting irrationally and randomly but as the film goes along we see how she is putting everything together to get what she wants essentially any kind of reward for all of those with who she is involving without their knowledge as to the overall goal.
For a film that seems to be about Mostly dancing there are no sustained long-term dance sequences. As some of the scenes are edited more briskly With plenty of cuts more like a music video.
You believe everything to be random out of freedom then in the third act a reveal happens that brings it all Together.
This is one of the horniest yet not erotic films I have seen recently. As it is erotic but doesn’t exactly aim in that direction. Though the characters seem more exhibitionist and more Hedonistic. As it seems to open itself and showcase open and polyamorous relationships
As the film presents sex and sexuality as non-judge mental more open and quite naturalistic and feral. As more matter Of fact
Set at an institute devoted to culinary and alimentary performance, a collective finds themselves embroiled in power struggles, artistic vendettas, and gastrointestinal disorders.
This feels like almost self-parody and wanting to say something about artistic institutions. Though it almost feels that with each new film Of Writer-Director Peter Strickland. He goes step by step away from conformity and genre with Jisnfilms and into his own interests and inspirations showing himself to be a true auteur with any care to please his audience
As his films are always visually Stunning and captivating as far as production especially when it comes to surreal visions and the same Goes along with costuming
Whereas previous films seem to take aim at breaking down genres. This film Feels like a satire and exploration of the artistic creation of his own imagination. As at least this is captivating instead of confusing even if only visually and thematically
It is always a film That will Appeal to Or repulse the senses. Also offering a look at the absurdity of it and creation and expressing it. So beautiful that the Film Looks like it is Constantly Taking Place during a photoshoot.
I Don’t Understand what was going on half the time but I liked it and its Visuals if looking for some sense exactly This might not be the Film For you.
The power struggles involved in collaboration the drama inside of it and how your creation is perceived by the outside world as well as directing and guiding it For the best way for it to be remembered.
How Much even when you Investigate and try to examine the art or get to the heart of it. how easily it can be pulled into the creation and become a part of it. As you have input me can help shape it even just by being a witness and spreading the word about it affecting its development
As journalists can do in profiling a celebrity becoming Part Of Their Lives for Short Periods of Time but still having that experience and bonding for short periods of time. Persuasions participation, Now even when trying to be a fly On the wall and just document you Can’t help But be pulled into the orbit and be part of that universe
Where the Audiences appreciation and feedback we barely get Glimpses of and are more like a sexual orgy. Getting more and more absurd, not as strictly Over the top comedy, but more detached and obscure as it Goes along even as we learn more information about everybody.
Though constantly Stays avant-garde and close To its art-house roots
The film Almost Feels Like a chronicle of a band at each other’s throats as they try to make their next album and all The fears coming to a head during the process, especially when trying
To work It out with others you know so well and need one another but also desire space though feel like you are the only ones who know and understand one another.
Done it plenty of times but this time feels different and somehow more important. Always on the edge of the perverse and even fetishism
Just as the head of the institute comes across as either the Producer or record exec trying to shape the product and collective themselves while Trying To Be part of the creative process thing offering nothing of more creatively and if anything trying to water down or Make it
More accessible which goes against everything the collective seems to be about. Even if it means using seduction to get insider information and flip a member to have a person on the inside and being able to use them To spread their influence.
Each act seems to focus on a different member of the group or so it would seem as one character barely Gets center stage but is always shown and in the background and the character who seems to Come To More Prominence in the second act soon seems To be a major focus event high in the front act barely Spoke
Though the third act is the shortest maybe it makes sense that the character who It seems To focus on feels underserved throughout but is the glue practically the middle child Also the most Melodramatic. While the doctor represents the old-school Patriarchy.
The filmmaker Exerts himself as a filmmaker of His own unique vision and view.
How in art you Seem To reveal Yourself though only when it feels Personal do truly Realize maybe you revealed too much or See how Power and jealousy are at the heart of everything
Cooking Food Is its Own Art It takes Steps In the form Of Recipes and you are always struggling to get it right and is Essential in survival and is used by most as an expression of Care for health. Yet also is A process in which someone can be kissed and can mean something to so Many Others who follow and Look at it for insight.
You Can Also look at it as an examination of the relationship between the artist, the enthusiastic backers and Money men, fans, critics, and The Audience
High concept and our reporter man on the inside all of this half the time Of more insight into his farts and stomach problems rather than exposing his findings.
This film Was definitely an experience. Where it makes little sense to me. Though I admire the craft & stays interesting. Peter Strickland goes more into his artistic interests and visions. I look at this as a film about creation. Almost like a band trying to finish an album and what they have to face to finish. To truly reach their artistic vision and breakthrough
A movie only director Peter Strickland could make, sticking to his vision, interests, and instincts. Displaying his talent and unwavering in his direction. Even when it seems the film will go for conventional methods, it resists. Though dealt with seriously the film can be seen as a comedy of sorts. It’s not vague but has many ways of looking at it and finding definition in the details
Cast: David Schwimmer, Chris Cooper, Emily Procter, Matt Frewer, Kathleen Wilhoite, John Stockwell, Louise Fletcher, Terry O’Quinn, Lisa Marie, Amanda Foreman, Lyle Lovett, Julie McCullough, Rena Riffel, Raphael Sbarge
Two doctors create breast implants. However, when success and money come their way, they separate and follow different paths.
An HBO original tv-movie made for cable when it came out. Using the formula of two popular actors not quite strong enough for a box office release. As the subject which you would think fills seats isn’t quite ready for the big screen.
The film has a good handle on the subject by presenting us a story of characters who seem to have our attention and sympathies at first but then get affected by greed and sort of switch places but in the end are characters we despise.
Don’t know how exactly fact-based the film is but it stays sleazy as the characters and subject matter does. While keeping your interest. It is loosely based on fact obviously to keep it more dramatic and interesting and offer a more moralistic tale.
As there is plenty of nudity on display which is understandable considering the subject, but obviously more under the male gaze most of the time. As well as having unnecessary sex scenes.
As we have scenes where women offer their stories and confessions. Where we never see their face, only their breasts, as they talk.
So that it becomes more exploitive than maybe it was initially conceived or maybe that was the plan the whole time to mix the exploitive with the dramatic and offer some kind of poignancy.
As David Schwimmer’s Character goes from being a brilliant surgeon to more on the shy side and having an obsession with breasts and an idea on how to revolutionize plastic surgery on them. To begin, change by success and general greed. To where he seems to have lost his soul. When the consequences of these surgeries present themselves later and he finds no guilt within himself even when his mother is one of the people he performed the procedure on.
Chris cooper’s character at least shows having the most soul. At first not have faith in Schwimmer’s character then goes into business with him but goes their separate ways when Schwimmer feels he deserves more credit and copper’s character is more conservative and performs more for the elite. Whereas Schwimmer seems to perform for whoever as long as they can pay and alter the ethics. As They both reach cruel yet poetic justice ends.
One of the obvious problems of the film is the title says it all. How to tell this story delicately or at least tastefully and there isn’t.
As it is an interesting subject but unfortunately this story of discovery isn’t populated with worthwhile Decent characters. They are filled with characters who seem to want to do the right thing but money and success go to their heads.
In the end, it feels like a film that wants to be moralistic and a dark comedy with dramatic overtones. That unfortunately isn’t that funny and comes off as awkward and dirty.
Cast: Cesar De Sutter, Koen De Sutter, Mira Helmer, Brent Minne, Fania Sorel
15-year-old Jesse is the only one who witnessed the stabbing of his friend Jonas. Now he has to face his family and friends form the BMX riders crew and explain the unexplainable – how he feels about it.
If not Into impressionistic and experimental films this is not the film for you.
As it seems as not much happens and everything happens as we watch a young teen come to grips with his feelings about witnessing his friends endlessly get murdered and we see how this murder affects those around him including the victim’s family but not much happens and everything happens
Obviously heavy emotionally we see the pain and feelings on others’ faces but the main. Teen is expressionless either trying to come. To grips with his feelings or trying to feel something as very one is expecting it but doesn’t know howS
If you look, For a more Plot centered film, this is not for you. If you want to watch a study in grief where the film keeps a slow pace and is more about the everyday this is for you.
There are some striking shots and visuals but that is all there is as the film feels simplistic but wants to show a certain depth. It achieves what it aims for and while some might be able to get something or at least what they seek out of it.
It personally leaves one cold. A slice of Life and a sort of coming of age that for a film that showcases life feels lifeless itself.
As less like witnessing and just watching a bunch of shots comes together that might have been glorious b roll footage for another film. Though at least here it has some kind of meaning for you to take away. Define for yourself
Plotless and lacking any kind of dramatics at least traditionally almost like improv where you are meant to assign what they are thinking or feeling by little clues as to their expressions or behavior
Though an audience is left to see the film’s worth. As the film does try to connect but leaves you to pick up the pieces.
So it is almost like the lead character who will not give anyone anything emotionally but as we are connected to him as our protagonist we try to figure him out abs kind of put our own thoughts and concerns on display in our minds
Some could easily call this lazy filmmaking but the filmmaker is more interested in getting a reaction from the audience that the film lacks by letting visuals and sound linger more than anything documenting with a cinematic flair rather than aiming the story or narrative in any particular way or direction.
Depending on. What you came to the film for Will predict your interpretation or any kind of entertainment/enjoyment you might get.
This is more of a film. To be studied and presented at a museum as an exhibit than anything else traditional
Throughout it seems that like the lead, No one Knows how to communicate really.
Alas it feels like you are sitting around for a scene or a moment where it all makes sense or just idiots that you have been sitting through and it never comes
A lot of lingering shots of nothing really happening that individuals come to nothing but as a whole might come together to mean something or at least that is my interpretation.
A Movie that director Gus Van Sant would have loved to have made. A movie where it seems like the filmmaker wants you to do most of the work like CACHE.
As this is just a presentation and they want you to come up with what you think it’s about and connect things in your own way
Cast: Niko Nicotera, Sam Quartin, Mark Boone Junior, Marilyn Manson, William Lee Scott, Michael Potts, Gore Abrams, Megan Mattox, Danny Boy O’Connor, Michael Sheamus
A cerebral revenge film about two adopted siblings who fall in love, and hatch a plan to kill their abusive father.
At first, if you are a fan of the television show SONS OF ANARCHY you will notice four of the actors from that show are in this film. A kind of reunion playing the same type of characters
The mood of the film is a lot like that show and TRUE DETECTIVE mixed where the characters here are flawed and most are reprehensible. As they are all either criminals, addicts, or low lives, and the only innocence in the film is sniffed out quickly.
Though the film will make you believe there is beauty in this darkness you just have to try and see it. Throughout the film will try to make each scene filled with some kind of depth or philosophical wonder.
At heart, there is a love story that can never be fulfilled or allowed.
As most of this film Feels like a crime story though it doesn’t have those thrills. There are no scenes of hold-ups or even planning of scores even for all of its Violence which never quite feels unnecessary. Though you wish more was happening.
The most striking character who walks away with the film is the hitman played by Marilyn Manson who seems to have Seen it all.
So much that nothing phases him and he really has no loyalty but isn’t going to shoot you in the back for no reason either.
At times the film chooses to play with the timeline and the film does feel enriched to a certain Degree. You only wish the story was stronger to give us some reason to care more and to get more involved in the film. As it seems to have the necessities but not the goods.
Written & Directed By: James Toback Cinematography: Larry McConkey Editor: Suzy Elmiger
Cast: Neve Campbell, Frederick Weller, Dominic Chianese, Joelle Carter, James Toback, Barry Primus, Karen Allen, Michael Mailer, Lori Singer, Mike Tyson, Damon Dash,
Feeling undervalued by her boyfriend, a young woman begins to explore her sexuality with other people.
Writer/Director James Toback rests a little too easily on the audience’s knowledge of his past work. He was a pretty much in-demand screenwriter, though became so tangled in controversy he is considered canceled in the industry.
I used to watch his films more for their examination of relationships but also for the way they were developed and filmed. More artistic and definitely more improvised.
This was the last of his films that I watched in a movie theater and this was the third strike in which I was very disappointed. After so much hype. After BLACK & WHITE and HARVARD MAN. Was really hoping for much better. Even if it was me and 3 other people in total in the theater to watch this film on opening day no less.
Neve Campbell in the lead role does fine with the role but she comes off a little too ordinary and long in the tooth to play this seductress that the male characters seem to obsess over. Though maybe more her personality and charm make it believable and let your guard down and hook you. Even though the role isn’t that strong, but puts her at the center of things and usually has the upper hand.
This might have been his way of making a Femme Fatale the main character and center of the film. His view of giving her agency, As she is put up as a pawn, but is actually in control most of the time. Even if the film never treats her as favorable. Toback seems to want to offer a film that is a conversation starter and shows him more about the side of the female characters. Even if when you watch more of his films from the second half of his career. He populates his films with these types of female characters. He paints as more scheming but never the main character. He also never truly offers any insight into their psyche. They just seem to behave in this manner as the stories require it for the films to have twists or tension
Frederick Walker is the only exciting and believable performance out of the main characters. This movie comes off as more an expressive and visual play than a movie. As it feels opened up to include more backdrops and scenery.
The film teases the audience when it comes to sex and nude scenes. That ends up rather Unrevealing and tame for a movie that is supposed to be an erotic drama. Even the brief one in central park is so brief and seemingly played more for laughs.
The film offers strange cameos. One would guess is to the unpredictable nature of New York and its characters, but the characters in the cameos are more interesting than the main ones. Where we wish the film could follow or involve them more.
Even writer/director James Toback cameos as a parody of himself and his fascination with African Americans.
The film doesn’t do intentional comedy well. The laughs in this movie are more unintentional.
The story doesn’t make sense. As you wonder, the count can’t get his own women even though he is apparently world famous and would go to this sleazy guy, just to spend some time with his girlfriend?
The film does have good camera work and a good soundtrack. Those are the film’s strengths. As it never feels real and it constantly feels like an act or a show.
Written & Directed by: Randall Wallace Based On The Novels “Vingt Ans Apres” & “La Victome De Bragalonne” By: Alexander Dumas Cinematography: Peter Suschitzky Editor: William Hoy
Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Gabriel Byrne, Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, Gerard Depardieu, Judith Godreche, Anne Parillaud, Peter Sarsgaard, Edward Atterton, Hugh Laurie, Laura Fraser, Leonor Varela
Paris is starving, but the King of France is more interested in money and bedding women. When a young soldier dies for the sake of a shag, Aramis, Athos, and Porthos band together with a plan to replace the king. Unknown to many, there is a 2nd king, a twin, hidden at birth, then imprisoned for 6 years behind an iron mask. All that remains now is D’Artagnan, will he stand against his long-time friends, or do what is best for his country?
I remember being excited to see this in theaters with such a distinguished cast playing the musketeers and Leonardo DiCaprio’s first film right after TITANIC. Filmed before that film I believe but released relatively soon after. While I wasn’t a particular fan of that movie. I was a fan of DiCaprio. Who at that point. Had been gaining a lot of buzzes.
I really didn’t like the film as I watched it in theaters I remember being heavily disappointed and downright bored. It had its highlights but there were relatively few of them. Watching the film years later I have to say it is still disappointing.
It didn’t help that this movie was advertised as having more action than it ended up having. Watching it now even the action scenes aren’t very inspired or all that vivid. They lack any skill or any finesse and look like they are running and wrestling one another.
In fact, the only thing the film has going for it is the cast. Leonardo DiCaprio playing dual roles keeps your attention and shows here that he is much better in villainous roles. As he was on his way up to stardom and making quite a male for himself. This role showed he was more about the craft somewhat than the box office.
Other than him the actors playing the musketeers are so loved and fun you almost want a separate film all about them. As they bring life to the film and their scenes. Putting a spin on each of their characters. So that they show charisma and can be both funny and captivating often in the same sentence.
The film feels like a movie made to be watched in English classes teaching the book to make the material more vivid for the kids. As everything looks like a set and bland in the background. As the film never displays any real passion or energy. So that it almost feels like reading the book. Which I never have. It comes off as a throwback to classic studio adaptations, Where they just throw stars at the material and hope it sticks in with a certain audience.
The female lead, Judith Godreche really has little to do. She just seems to be a pretty face here. Her character is more put there to be a means to an end. The curse of her character is her beauty which sets everything in motion. As she comes across as a plot convenience and somewhat eye candy. So later the fate of her character never even feels that shocking or dramatic.
In the end, it feels almost like a school production only with a budget. The film at times tries but misses the target.
Written & Directed By: Damien Chazelle Cinematography: Linus Sandgren Editor: Tom Cross Music By: Justin Hurwitz
Cast: Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, John Legend, Rosemarie DeWitt, J.K. Simmons, Finn Wittrock, Callie Hernandez, Jessica Rothe, Sonoya Mizuno, Valarie Rae Miller, Tom Everett Scott
Aspiring actress serves lattes to movie stars in between auditions and jazz musician Sebastian scrapes by playing cocktail-party gigs in dingy bars. But as success mounts, they are faced with decisions that fray the fragile fabric of their love affair, and the dreams they worked so hard to maintain in each other threaten to rip them apart.
This is a big Hollywood epic with an indie sensibility.
The film Might be overpraised by some but doesn’t mean the film is without merits.
There haven’t been really too many musicals lately this one came along and is more the classical with having a more avant garde way of telling the story but in a more mainstream way of advancing story and having an emotional core with the songs. Instead of them being an extravaganza meant to be show stoppers and really just there to dazzle.
Though the movie can easily be written off as trying to tell It’s story in a classic mode that hasn’t been sued in a while and going. For a certain glory. This film feels like it can only be told in this way
As the film Shows a love of the genre as well as playing by the rules and adding a spin of it’s own. As it Also has a kind of successful A STAR IS BORN type story. Only without the heaviness of a tragic ending. Though it does have it’s own tragic ending of sorts.
The ending is tragic in that it offers up some hope at first before letting the wind out of the soaps of the audience. That reminds the audience of the reality vs fantasy sequence in 500 DAYS OF SUMMER. It’s beautifully and so emotional that every note feels like a moment. Though it is meant to pull on your heartstrings and have an emotional reaction yourself which makes it all the more memorable. As the characters and we Review and look back over all the decisions might they have had a chance to go another way. Not to mention a future that could have been.
An homage to musical while being one itself though owing more to European ones which they share the theme of success but tragedy choosing to show the peril Of the relationship that goes with individual success the difference between art and commerce with a kind of ending that fools us with that could have been making the wound hurt more.
Which is where it doesn’t Feel as familiar in the second half the after the happily ever after even if it involves a character who kind of appropriates culture though more to a degree but that is more subjective than anything a romance at least. Though through it all the film Wears it’s influences and even if knowing where it is going leaves surprises or at least attempts them. Which keeps the audience on it’s tied and excited as the film goes along.
This shows A love of film and a great love story that might remind many of theirs or at least a dream one they wish they had. A reminder of CinemaScope and technicolor musicals of all ages. As it is hopeful and energetic but shows struggling and settling then finding fame and success and it’s painful aftermath. That while great for the individual is not healthy for a relationship. As one might have to settle or give up their dreams and drive for the other to prosper.
A story that shows of old Hollywood and jazz, A throwback simpler classy times. There is Nothing vulgar about it. Which is becoming increasingly rare in movies these days. At least when it comes to movies that have a certain pedigree.
The Dancing is noteworthy. It not phenomenal to show the characters are human and normal. The magic you feel and how strong those emotions or how you wish they would be. The First half feels like a broadway musical almost as it gets closer to reality and more serious less and less musicals
The film Feels like a fair sided testament. The film is infectious and makes you want to watch More as it stays inventive.
The filmmakers previous films all have music or revolve around it. So that you can tell he has a passion for it and in his storytelling here it is goes hand and hand with the story. As This feels more a continuation of GUY AND MADELINE IN THE PARK his first film. WHIPLASH his next film takes place around music and passion but also seemed more dramatic, destructive and dark.
This film Almost feels like a film stitched together from your favorite parts of songs and movies the scenes you fast forward or rewind over and over to get to. Though under a different or new coat. It owes a deep debt definitely to it’s influences like YOUNG GIRLS OF ROCHEFORT and UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG
Directed By: Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner & Simon Wells
Written By: Philip LaZebnik
Cast: (Voices) Val Kilmer, Ralph Fiennes, Michelle Pfeiffer, Sandra Bullock, Jeff Goldblum, Danny Glover, Patrick Stewart, Steve Martin, Martin Short, Helen Mirren, James Avery, Eden Reigel
Egyptian Prince Moses learns of his identity as a Hebrew and his destiny to become the chosen deliverer of his people.
This movie really takes me back as I remember it being a big release at the time and a big holiday one at that. I was working at a movie theater at the time of my first job and remember the shows staying packed for weeks full. Almost every show.
I also remember how messy yet warm and sweet-smelling the theaters would be afterward. Not only that but constantly hear the duet by Whitney Houston & Mariah Carey on the song BELIEVE.
This embezzled that song into my head and anytime I hear it now it reminds of this movie and takes me to a happy place.
Shocked, it took me so long to see this last film. As one never watched it in theaters and can tell that was a lost opportunity. As this definitely works best on a big screen. As the story is epic, so is the film. Even for an animated movie, it feels majestic.
It tells such a grand story in a short amount of time with plenty of impacts.
Not usually a fan of biblical films but this doesn’t feel preachy. It just feels like a story from history with some supernatural elements. Though still is a story about the strength of character and faith.
Watching the film you might prefer fewer songs that make it feel more like a musical without song and dance numbers but montages and memories instead.
Which also helps counter and explain its darkness in the second half.
It allows for more stories to be told in a shorter time. As well as showcase their emotions in the moment and at the time of course most family animated films do have songs to keep kids and some adults from feeling restless though for this film. Not to mention it helps embed the movie into memories through those sing-along songs. This is impressive all-around yet more for adults, there could have been less.
The animation is impressive and has stood the test of time.
Even in one of the action scenes such as the final battle scenes and the sandstorm sequences and the miracles/plagues.
Cast: Neil Maskell, David Hayman, Laura McAlpine, Yassine Mkhichen, David Nellist, Tamzin Outhwaite, Kellie Shirley
Bull mysteriously returns home after a 10-year absence to seek revenge on those who double-crossed him all those years ago.
The film’s opening scene sets up the rest of the movie really with an introduction of the title character that is strong whole also showcases the tough tone of the film.
What is more shocking are the tender moments of the film of which there are a few and a kind of strange twist of fates.
The film plays pretty predictably offering a few twists, but pretty much most of the film is watching the character take his revenge while every so often the film tells us the backstory of what led to this in the first place.
The title character isn’t a saint he was pretty violent beforehand and now has been left off his leash and takes very few prisoners. The only thing that he has a soft spot for before all of this was his son. As he is a pretty good dad, though surrounded by nasty characters who either find themselves into this out of loyalty or money
While the film is mainly predictable it is strong and keeps you engaged throughout. There is no get on the film as it gets to the point and for the most part, is relentless throughout.
As the violence is either shown or heavily suggested. So this film isn’t for the faint of heart. One thing that is always fascinating in these films is when the film chooses to more focus on those being hunted down and killed. As you can see those who are used to being hunters react to being prey.
Once you find out the film’s budget was low. It’s even more impressive what was done and how tight the film is.
