tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-83957887446800078762024-02-28T15:41:52.213-08:00The Middle RoomWelcome to the middle room. We have plenty of chairs here, plenty of seats, and all are of course welcome to join us.
The icosahedron lies within, and it is ever turning. Do you dare gaze into its many faces?
Know this: this is neither the front room, nor is it the back.
You have entered the middle room. It lies between the other two, and the cool kids sit elsewhere.Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.comBlogger505125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-50722443817509395772023-12-31T08:47:00.000-08:002023-12-31T08:47:02.606-08:002023 Retrospective<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyRSnKBfNfbmx6S__fFgFkDSaEZNjN-v6xprDv_mL1eli1zg41O0zZqcj5tYLw1fm11q1JBxglZbhLuuXlb2GCw9NL-97lgZAWmt1s4sOvWTyv4gIjmYkZDWO0eJv94fvfCB2nuS6ovmAGmsSVKVoXUD2daFWYMSeV6HgBw1n0CDjDwS26YxdJgq9fyGxm/s3625/PXL_20231229_025706988.MP.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3072" data-original-width="3625" height="271" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyRSnKBfNfbmx6S__fFgFkDSaEZNjN-v6xprDv_mL1eli1zg41O0zZqcj5tYLw1fm11q1JBxglZbhLuuXlb2GCw9NL-97lgZAWmt1s4sOvWTyv4gIjmYkZDWO0eJv94fvfCB2nuS6ovmAGmsSVKVoXUD2daFWYMSeV6HgBw1n0CDjDwS26YxdJgq9fyGxm/s320/PXL_20231229_025706988.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />Compared to the seventy new movies and shows I got on my list last year, 2023 is going to be a bit light. There are a couple reasons for this, the first being that Nintendo released a Zelda game, which took up a great deal of my time over the past year. In addition, I only wound up seeing a handful of new Christmas movies in 2023 - this year was more about exploring older films - so the list isn't anywhere near as padded as last year's.<p></p><p>That also means there's a lot I didn't get to. I've literally got a stack of blu-rays beside my TV of movies I still need to see, in addition to a massive watchlist of stuff that's streaming or that I'm waiting to hit streaming. I've spent the last week doing my best to catch up, but there's much I haven't gotten to. And that's not even considering God knows how many things that aren't even on my radar. If I were to redo my lists of the past five years, more than half would have new films in the top spot, in some cases ones I hadn't heard of while making the original lists (including the science-fairytale Vesper, which is now my favorite movie of 2022).</p><p>So, you know, grains of salt and all that.</p><p>As always, the basic premise remains the same: the following list of movies and shows is ranked from least to most <i>favorite</i>, which isn't the same as how they'd be ranked if I were going from worst to best. For example, if I were trying to rank these according to quality, I'd give up, delete the article, and not do the whole "end of year retrospective" at all.</p><p>And where would be the fun in that.</p><p>Before I even start with the list, I want to acknowledge a couple things I'm not ranking but was still floored by. First, Lindsay Ellis's video essay, The Ballad of John and Yoko, is an incredible work absolutely worth checking out. Similarly, Patrick H. Willems's Bollywood essay is wonderful. These are arguably the two best internet video essayists alive, each with career bests - check them out.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>53. Secret Invasion</b></p><p>In their defense, they were clearly trying to make something different. This miniseries aims for a much darker tone than the MCU is known for, and they deserve credit for the attempt. But, more than anything else still part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (so exempting apocrypha like Iron Fist and The Inhumans), this just doesn't work.</p><p>The main issue, in my opinion, comes down to the premise making it all a little too easy to juggle identities. We know upfront that anyone could at any moment be a shapeshifting alien, so we're never at all surprised when it turns out to be true. The show is structured around a series of twists and shocks, and none of them pack much impact.</p><p>Okay, to be fair, there was one fake-out I actually loved, and unsurprisingly it wasn't related to secret identities or shapeshifting. And some of the Fury/Talos banter was fun. But beyond that, this was a bit of a slog I'd have abandoned after the first episode if it hadn't been part of the MCU. In aping the Netflix Marvel shows' tone it sacrifices almost all of the lighthearted fun that makes most Marvel stuff work, and couldn't manage to import any of the emotional weight that characterized the better Netflix installments.</p><p>The unfortunate part of this is they'll no doubt learn the wrong lesson from the blowback the show's receiving and rein in attempts to experiment with new tones and styles. It wasn't the desire to innovate that made this one disappointing - it was the failed execution.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>52. 65</b></p><p>Was this supposed to be a video game? The movie's premise feels like it's tailor-made for that medium, between the minimal cast size, ticking clock, and omnipresent threats. The direction follows suit, with action sequences that oscillate between those of shooters and moments that feel more like quicktime events than most actual video game quicktime events.</p><p>There's nothing inherently wrong with drawing on games (or any other medium) for inspiration (watch Kong: Skull Island to see it done right), but co-writer/directors Scott Beck and Bryan Woods struggle to find anything other than the initial "...but with dinosaurs" hook to make their movie stand out. Pitch Black, more than anything else, feels like the template they're trying to replicate, but that offered surprising twists and great B-movie character work - this does not.</p><p>That's not to say this is entirely awful, mind you: some of the creature designs are pretty good, there are some solid action sequences, and whether or not they knew what to do with him, Adam Driver is still Adam Driver. It's not a total waste, and depending on how much you like dinosaurs and how bored you are, this might even be worth sitting through - far be it for me to suggest there shouldn't be a place for disposable genre entertainment in the world.</p><p>But make no mistake, this is about as disposable as movies come. The emotional beats are cliché and obvious from the start, the premise is even more ridiculous than the trailer suggests, and the dour tone holds it back from being anywhere near as fun as it should be.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>51. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/11/genie-2023.html">Genie</a></b></p><p>I like Melissa McCarthy's performance here, but as a whole this was a really bad idea. The 1991 movie this is remaking, <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/11/bernard-and-genie-1991.html">Bernard and the Genie</a>, holds up pretty well (or at least the comedy does - the stereotypes, not so much). This tries too hard to differentiate and update the story and in the process breaks the tone entirely.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>50. The Flash</b></p><p>The first ten minutes or so were actually pretty good as a live-action comedic take in the vein of Batman: Brave and the Bold. I felt the same way about the theatrical cut of Justice League, with the caveat no ten minutes of that movie were anywhere near as well constructed as the opening of this. Unfortunately, the rest of The Flash is more or less on par with Justice League.</p><p>The main problem is a disconnect between what Ezra Miller's doing and the tone the movie settles into (to the limited extent it ever settles into a tone at all). Miller's basically playing their characters as throwbacks to '80s and '90s adventure/comedy, and - to be fair - I think the script is pointing that way (the Back to the Future nods feel like a hint). Whether director Muschietti dropped the ball or Warner Bros executives broke this in post-production will have to remain an open question, but either way the movie just doesn't work.</p><p>Part of me thinks that's a pity - there are some good ideas and moments sprinkled throughout, and Sasha Calle was robbed of a chance to shine. At the same, it's hard to mourn too deeply given the disturbing allegations surrounding Miller.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>49. Red, White & Royal Blue</b></p><p>There's a lot to appreciate in this. Personally, I found the decision to openly acknowledge the politics refreshing - there's sort of a tradition to obfuscate who the bad guys are in this subgenre to avoid offending half the country, and I appreciate them just outright taking a stand here. The cast is good, as well (Uma Thurman is fantastic in a supporting role).</p><p>But the movie also makes some baffling choices around tone and setting I found off-putting. I understand this isn't supposed to be realistic, but when you're playing with aspects of the politics that are widely understood, you need to take care not to come across as insulting the audience's intelligence. When this casually asserts that American voters care about a trade deal with Great Britain, for example, I raised an eyebrow. And again when they showed a snow-covered New Year's Eve in Washington, DC. Or when Secret Service kept being conveniently absent.</p><p>I'm also not sold on way the movie juggled subgenres. I'm not certain this was a mistake - the styles shift in a way I think was intentional - but it still makes it difficult to wrap your head around the world and get pulled into the story.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>48. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/the-velveteen-rabbit-2023.html">The Velveteen Rabbit</a></b></p><p>While reviewing this, I had to struggle to try and separate my own reaction to the material from my assessment of its quality. Fortunately, that's not an issue here, as this list is simply based on how much I enjoyed each piece of media.</p><p>And overall this one left me a little cold. I like moments and aspects (some quite a bit), but I couldn't shake the feeling I was seeing something where too many crucial decisions were made by whatever committee of executives greenlit the project.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>47. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/its-wonderful-knife-2023.html">It's a Wonderful Knife</a></b></p><p>Even compared to other uneven films, this one's really uneven. The prologue is fantastic as a mini-slasher and there are some great characters (and even greater performances), but there are far too many twists for a movie that's already built on a twist. The movie becomes so focused on what it wants each scene to be, it loses sight of the story and goes off the rails.</p><p>Still, there are some really good moments and character beats, plus at least one joke that bumped this up two or three spots. It's a long way from being a total loss, but it's even a longer way from working as a movie.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>46. Thunivu</b></p><p>Like a lot of movie geeks, RRR was something of a wakeup call to the fact there's a wealth of Indian genre cinema worth exploring. Thunivu was easily accessible and sounded interesting, so I gave it a shot.</p><p>The movie is, in a nutshell, bonkers. The best description I can offer is a mashup of heist, superhero, and (light) suspense; it's a lot to take in and process. Tonally, the movie is all over the place, shifting from serious reflections on economic injustice and political corruption to comedically over-the-top action sequences and musical numbers at the drop of a hat. I realize a similar observation could be made about RRR, but that felt much more balanced and deliberate in the way it combined its desperate elements. Thunivu comes across as a bit more patchwork.</p><p>I want to pause and clarify that's not necessarily a bad thing. Or, more accurately, that I lack the cultural background to say whether it's good or bad. My knowledge of South Indian action cinema consists of two movies as of writing this, so the context of genre conventions and artistic decisions is liable to go over my head.</p><p>What I can talk about is the way these play to similar viewers. Clearly, I found the experience odd, but not at all unpleasant. I was reminded of '90s American action flicks, which likewise tended to mix political and cultural themes with silly action. That said, this goes a lot further with that action: the superhero comparison isn't an exaggeration. While the main character is ostensibly a mortal man, he's capable of taking on dozens of opponents, and both his strength and resilience are on par with, say, Captain America's. Based on clips I've seen, this seems to be pretty normal in action movies coming out of India.</p><p>I found these fights delightful, though I worry some of that enjoyment could border on a lack of cultural awareness. I'm sure a great deal of the absurdity of the fights is self-aware, but without fully comprehending the cinematic language, the line between laughing with and at a movie can get blurry. Compounding the issue this time are several sequences where limitations in the visual effects are apparent. There's a mix of practical and CG explosions in the film, and some of the latter don't measure up.</p><p>Likewise, I'm unsure how to approach the plot, which seems like a nearly endless string of reveals and twists on twists. Excluding some sincere sequences, it plays like a parody of American heist movies, which I'm guessing was the intent. On one hand, it's all very silly and fun. On the other, I wasn't invested in the economic aspects of the movie, nor was I engaging emotionally with the characters. Again, I can't say whether this disconnect was due to a lack of cultural understanding or actual flaws in the movie; only that there's a pretty good chance other American viewers will have a similar experience.</p><p>And ultimately none of it was a deal-breaker. As a campy action flick with some ludicrous fight sequences, it makes for a fun time. Whether that's at all a fair summation of the film is a question for people far more familiar with the subgenre to answer. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>45. Elemental</b></p><p>To its credit, Elemental is a gorgeous movie, beautiful both to look at and listen to. Divorced from story and even premise, what's physically on screen is an artistic and technical achievement, and that should count for something. Unfortunately, the movie just doesn't work as... well, as a <b>movie</b>, and the main reasons for this boil down to some profoundly bad choices around genre and structure.</p><p>A somewhat baffling choice I feel bad disparaging is the decision not to make this a comedy. The reason I feel bad is that, in principle, it's the kind of wild, outside-the-box twist I should love: rather than structure Elemental as a series of jokes, the movie sidelines the humor and instead tells a fairly straightforward drama. Sure, there's still a bunch of comedic relief tossed in, but it's always secondary to the story (or more accurately, <b>stories</b>, but we'll get to that).</p><p>Again, in theory that's the kind of ambitious approach I usually love, but here it completely falls flat for three reasons. First, because this is a kid's movie, a fact that undermines any attempt to sell the drama as serious or believable. The movie just doesn't deliver complex, believable emotion, without which drama never works. The movie leans into visual and auditory cues to imply what's happening has real depth, but there's really not enough there.</p><p>Reason number two concerns the central conceit and metaphor at the heart of the film - the whole "elementals" thing. Part of this connects with the first issue, in the way the movie wants you to think the whole mixed elements/mixed-ethnic relationship idea is profound when it just isn't. But even beyond this, the world of Elemental is distractingly weird. I'm more than willing to suspend disbelief for stuff like this, but nothing here feels sufficiently thought out. Laws of physics, biology, and - hell - just actual laws seem to change on a whim. That's forgivable if there are resonant emotional connections driving the shifts, or if the movie uses them stylistically, but neither is the case here.</p><p>Finally, the drama in the A- and B-plots don't work because there's also a C-plot. I strongly suspect this issue was introduced in the movie's development - my guess is the original pitch was happy to leave the conflict limited to a Romeo and Juliet style romance between the elemental pair, along with Ember's complex relationship with her father. But instead of giving that space to breathe, they added an intrusive generic Pixar adventure plot concerning a water leak that makes absolutely no sense and kills the last chance the movie had of ever being taken seriously.</p><p>Again, the animation looks really good, which buys this some goodwill. But that's somewhat mitigated by the realization that replacing the vocal soundtrack with, say, a random Enya album would result in a more fulfilling experience.</p><p>This is one of only three Pixar movies I mostly find boring, which is why - despite its merits - it's buried this far back on this list.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>44. The Super Mario Bros. Movie</b></p><p>Someone get Illumination a participation trophy or something: this was fine. It was lazy, of course, and had more payoffs tied to old video games than anything substantive in the movie, but it was diverting enough for the most part. The visuals were generally good. I liked Peach and really liked Toad. Pratt voicing Mario didn't annoy the hell out of me, which alone is more than I expected.</p><p>It's disposable, but in the scheme of things, that's probably as good as it could ever seriously have aspired to be.</p><div><br /></div><p><b>43. Renfield</b></p><p>This was fine, but to leave an impression it needed to either be a lot funnier or, you know, actually good. It's leaning too hard on the premise to make up the difference, and that premise isn't anywhere near as interesting as they seem to think it is.</p><p>There are solid elements - Cage is fun, as usual, and Hoult and Awkwafina do good work. But the homages feel hollow, and the movie comes off more reminiscent of films from the early 2000s than the eras it's supposedly referencing.</p><p>Also - and I realize this is a dumb thing to complain about - but it really bothered me that Dracula existed in world as a known cultural icon, while name "Renfield" seemed to mean nothing. I'm sure we're supposed to assume that books (and maybe movies) about Dracula exist without the character of Renfield, but the surface-level contradiction pulled me out of the narrative. It felt like the movie's problems in a nutshell: they were invoking the history of the story to attract fans, but then crafted a story watered down for audiences more familiar with superhero movies.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>42. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/a-biltmore-christmas-2023.html">A Biltmore Christmas</a></b></p><p>The first of a couple Hallmark time-travel romcoms on this list. For the most part, this was decent - a better ending would have pushed it up a few spaces. Not much further, though, as this was a bit too ambitious for the what the studio was willing to invest, even with whatever money or accommodations the Biltmore estate was willing to kick in for the somewhat absurd advertising.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>41. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/round-and-round-2023.html">Round and Round</a></b></p><p>I realize calling something "not bad" is kind of damning with faint praise, but all things considered, I'd say this Hallmark movie isn't in an awful spot. Frankly, it's impressive any TV movies are outperforming "real" movies, let alone some big budget productions. Round and Round has plenty of flaws and shortcomings (the jokes weren't quite funny enough, the drama doesn't hit quite hard enough, and so on), but all things considered it's got a lot of heart. I enjoyed this one well enough and respect it even more... but you really need to make more of an impression to move further up the list.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>40. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/exmas-2023.html">EXMas</a></b></p><p>I know we're still in the back half of this list, but I think it's worth taking a moment to acknowledge how incredible it is this made it as far as it did. Frankly, when I put this on, I expected it to be awful - after all, we're talking about a low-budget Christmas romcom with a gimmicky title and premise almost certainly rushed through production to finish filming before the strikes and released on Freevee. I'm not sure how many more warning flags you can possibly add to a single movie.</p><p>But despite all that, this was (for the most part) funny and endearing. It had its share of issues, of course (awkward greenscreening, haphazard set decorations, and the usual assortment of sequences that just don't work), but at the end of the say I was genuinely shocked by how solid it was acted, directed, and shot.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>39. The Bad Batch, Season 2</b></p><p>Overall, I liked the second season of The Bad Batch more than the first, though that's not saying all that much. The premise of this show never entirely worked for me: I find most of the characters a bit simplistic. This is essentially a throwback to '80s and '90s Saturday morning cartoon dynamics, both in terms of gender distribution and character archetypes. I respect what they're trying to accomplish, but it still feels weirdly antiquated.</p><p>That said, the show has its moments. Every third or fourth episode delivers something unexpectedly clever and/or shockingly effective, and it's worth sitting through just to reach those payoffs. It's odd the best stories seem to center around a character who's mainly been portrayed as the bad guy (though that may be shifting), but who cares as long as it works?</p><p><br /></p><p><b>38. Kizazi Moto: Generation Fire</b></p><p>Visually, this anthology is nothing short of breathtaking: gorgeous animation defines all ten installments. But given where this shows up on this list, you can probably guess I wasn't as smitten with the stories themselves. I don't think the writing here is bad, mind you. Each fifteen minute episode is a standalone sci-fi/fantasy piece set within its own world, and each story is first and foremost structured as a vessel for the animation.</p><p>While that's a good starting point, I kept feeling like the individual pieces left me wanting more. The worlds were intricately constructed, but - with maybe one or two exceptions - I felt like we were fast-forwarding through them. Most of these were trying to tell an elaborate, epic tale in fifteen minutes, and it just wasn't enough time to add much depth.<br /></p><p>As an animation showcase, this is still more than worthwhile, but any of these shorts expanded to feature length would have been infinitely more satisfying than what we got.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>37. Star Wars: Visions, Season 2</b></p><p>My thoughts on the second season of Visions are similar to those from the first - how effective each short is comes down to whether the individual studio reimagining Star Wars has a "vision" that enhances the source material or just kind of flounders. In this case, there were two that worked so well they made the entire collection (or volume or whatever we're supposed to call this) worthwhile: "Screecher's Reach" from Cartoon Saloon and "I am Your Mother" from Aardman. Tonally, these couldn't have been more different, with Cartoon Saloon delivering something deceptively dark and Aardman producing a comical (but nevertheless emotionally resonant) story. I loved these completely.</p><p>There were a number of others where I loved aspects - El Guiri's "Sith", Punkrobot's "In the Stars", and Studio La Cachette's "Spy Dancer" all spring to mind - but I always felt like a few aspects were off, or at the very least not quite what I was looking for. I wouldn't be at all surprised if every episode has its champions, though - even the ones that didn't connect with me were interesting and featured gorgeous animation.</p><p>The nature of compilations more or less guarantees they'll be uneven, but there's enough here to ensure I'll keep watching these as long as Disney keeps commissioning them. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>36. Shazam: Fury of the Gods</b></p><p>I really like approximately 95% of this movie. In fact, let me raise the stakes here: I think ~95% of Fury of the Gods deserves to be called good. Maybe even really good, despite some obvious flaws. Sure, the compositing needed work, but that's kind of a silly thing to get upset over. Likewise, the tonal shifts get awkward as this tries to be a fun kids' movie and a dark action flick at the same time, but that's more a marketing problem than an artistic one.</p><p>The real reason I think this wasn't better received is that the last ten minutes were just godawful. The Wonder Woman cameo was the largest offender of course - maybe the single worst cameo of its type I've ever seen. And that's with the caveat I'm half convinced the deus ex machina inherent in her arrival might have been an intentional nod to the fact the device has its roots in the same mythological tradition this movie (as well as Diana herself) reference. But even if that was a conscious choice, it still undercuts any emotional catharsis they might have gotten from a resolution with a proper setup.</p><p>How much that matters depends on how much weight you place on the destination compared to the journey. I know that sounds like a loaded statement, but endings leave an impression on movies, even when the climax of the story has already passed. And, while I liked the preceding film well enough, the laughable (in a bad way) closing moments had an impact.</p><p>Fortunately it wasn't enough to ruin the experience entirely. The cheesy, cartoonish superhero stuff was a lot of fun, and that counts for a lot, too. I like a lot of the choices made around the villains, particularly the decision to complicate questions over who was and wasn't ultimately a villain. The fantasy creatures were tons of fun, as well, and (while it might have landed a little better with less lampshading) I kind of love that the movie paid off an advertising campaign decades old.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>35. Ahsoka, Season 1</b></p><p>I find myself more than a little conflicted on this one. I really didn't like the first episode, but I enjoyed every subsequent one. I found this version of the title character bland compared with earlier incarnations, but it was delightful seeing these characters in live action, at all. I found the plot a little boring, but the new ideas (at least as far as live-action Star Wars is concerned) were great. Perhaps more importantly, I really liked the villains, all of whom felt like they had points of view and objectives more nuanced than "be evil."</p><p>At the end of the day, there are a lot things I wish had been done differently, but I'm not NOT going to like a show with space witches.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>34. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/the-naughty-nine-2023.html">The Naughty Nine</a></b></p><p>I spent a lot of the runtime unsure where exactly my opinion was going to fall. The movie started strong but faltered as it moved into the second act. The ending was mixed - I liked how the primary character arcs played out but found myself bothered by an almost authoritarian subtext. It really wasn't until the closing shot that my opinion coalesced.</p><p>Specifically, it was when the movie teased the possibility of a sequel, and I realized just how much I wanted them to make it. This has issues (quite a few, in fact), but I enjoyed it on the whole. For a silly TV kids' movie, that's about all you can ask for.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>33. The Last of Us, Season 1</b></p><p>This certainly isn't a situation where I've got any kind of hot take to share. The Last of Us is really good. The cast is great, the effects (and more importantly the overall visual design and execution) are great, it's cleverly adapted... basically, every aspect is really good. If this were a genre I was more invested in, it might be making a run for the top third of my list. Hell, if I didn't already know the plot through cultural osmosis, that might be enough.</p><p>But I did know the plot (or at least the main beats). And while I like the genres this was combining, they're not near and dear to my heart. This show wowed me, and I really liked it... but it didn't leave me floored the way my favorite shows do.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>32. Cunk on Earth</b></p><p>I realize this was released overseas in 2022, but it didn't come out on Netflix until this January, so I'm including it here. I should also note that, like virtually everyone else in America, I haven't seen Cunk on Britain or Charlie Brooker's Weekly Wipe, and further am taking it on faith that those are real shows and not something someone added to Wikipedia as a joke.</p><p>This miniseries is a great deal of fun, offering a pitch-perfect parody of documentaries about the history of civilization. Diane Morgan, the actress playing Cunk, nails every line with a perfect blend of sincerity masking the utter absurdity of the questions she's asking and statements she's making. If she'd ever acknowledged her jokes were jokes, this would have fallen flat: her consistency and skill at striking the right tone is the reason this works.</p><p>Credit should also go to the team behind the camera, who manage to make this visually identical to the genre its mocking. Also, whoever wrote the subtitled "facts" for the Pump Up the Jam bits is a genius.</p><p>Arguably, the series might be one episode longer than it should have been. I think the jokes in the fourth installment weren't quite up to par with the rest, but even then I was laughing.</p><p>It's hard to imagine any way this could have been better. That said, this is by design more limited in actual substance. It exists to make you laugh, but - aside from pointing out how superficial many documentaries are - there's not much of a point to the whole thing. It gets in some good jabs at real issues, but it's not trying to say anything particularly meaningful.</p><p>Which is fine! Not everything has to be a pointed, political statement or an experiment in alternative narrative structure. Cunk on Earth is trying to be silly, and it succeeds masterfully: I have no complaints. But as fun as this was, it doesn't feel like the kind of thing that's going to stay with me. I'd be happy to watch more, though. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>31. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2023/04/finale-frontier-extravaganza.html">The Mandalorian, Season 3</a></b></p><p>The ending is buying this season a lot of goodwill. Don't get me wrong: I'll always watch Star Wars stuff. Plus I loved the episode with Lizzo, Black, and Lloyd. And that crazy alien pterosaur they fought that was rendered to look like stop-motion was incredible.</p><p>But this is a two-sided lightsaber. The plotting was contrived and convoluted, the dialogue was awkward, and as patient as I was with a lead wearing a mask, when it's damn near everyone on screen it starts to feel like the people behind the camera aren't entirely clear what medium they're working in.</p><p>But then we got that ending. That beautiful, ridiculous, cheesy, exciting ending, complete with a brisk pace and cool effects. Hell, they even tossed in some decent character development and some really sweet moments with Din and... other Din, I guess. The finale alone bumped this up several spaces.</p><p>I just hope future Star Wars shows learn a few lessons from what's working and what isn't. Like I said, I'll keep watching regardless, but I'd rather have less ambiguous thoughts. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>30. Loki, Season 2</b></p><p>The strength of this season lies in Loki's arc - particularly the end of that arc. The weakness lies mostly in everyone else's stories, which feel superfluous. I wouldn't describe the experience as bad - the pace was fast, the cast was fun, and the dialogue amusing, so it all breezed by. I basically enjoyed the entire season as I was watching, but as soon as each episode ended (excluding the finale, of course) I found myself feeling like it was spinning its wheels. That ended with the last installment, which revealed the season had actually been building to something, and further that something was astonishingly cool. The shot of Loki quite literally embracing destiny might be one of my favorite visual moments in the entirety of the MCU, in a single instant justifying why both seasons of this show featured Loki as the protagonist of this particular story.</p><p>What it doesn't accomplish is justifying this story being told as a TV season. The medium was appropriate to the first season, since that was structured around various mini-adventures to different eras and places. But the bulk of the second season was a single story, and - again - that story could have been a lot more streamlined. We didn't need this many side-characters, most of whom weren't all that interesting (the main exception being Ouroboros, who's consistently delightful).</p><p>Really, this season should have been a movie. Loki's story was the interesting part, and that could have been covered in a fraction of the time.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>29. I'm a Virgo</b></p><p>Boots Riley's surreal deconstruction of a superhero world (and more pointedly of the capitalist police state) is fascinating, though after Sorry to Bother You, I feel like "fascinating" is a given when Riley's involved. Beyond that, it's virtually indescribable, mainly because its sensibilities and pacing don't align with entries in virtually any of the genres or mediums it slides into. This almost feels like a kids' show, but only insofar as its visuals, structure, and humor aren't restrained by conventions that make the vast majority of "grown up TV" relatively homogenous in ways that aren't apparent until you see something like I'm a Virgo actually do something truly and unmistakably different.</p><p>For the first two or three episodes, I was completely transfixed by the experience. As the show went on and I became more accustomed to the style, I basically settled into "just" liking it. I found myself oscillating between finding moments and images brilliant and finding others kind of underdeveloped. For better or worst, the series is more an experiment in worldbuilding than a unified story. I found myself wishing a few of the side plots had been cut and we'd spent more time on others. But that could entirely be preference - even the stuff that didn't click with me still seemed clever.</p><p>It's also worth reiterating that the stuff I liked, I <b>really</b> liked. This featured moments of brilliance bordering on transcendence, and I'm not sure those would have hit as hard in a more focused story. Beyond that, the visuals alone were incredibly inspired.</p><p>Like Sorry to Bother You, this left me intrigued and eager to see what madness Riley prepares next. He's one of the most original creators in live-action film or TV, and that alone makes everything he makes exciting.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>28. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2023/05/movie-review-peter-pan-wendy.html">Peter Pan & Wendy</a></b></p><p>At present, this is my third favorite live-action Disney remake, after The Jungle Book and Cruella. I don't think it's a coincidence all three are less remakes than entirely new adaptations that use their corresponding classic animated counterparts as inspiration, rather than blueprints. I'm quite a bit more forgiving towards The Lion King remake than most (I think it's a fascinating technical experiment), but I'd never claim it establishes itself as a film in its own right. But love them or hate them, these three are new stories, as are the live-action Dumbo and Maleficent movies (the latter of which probably holds the #4 spot and the former is a good reminder that "new" doesn't automatically equate to "good").</p><p>I really liked Peter Pan & Wendy, despite... well, despite a lot of things. The visual effects and design were hit-or-miss, the whole thing was tinted far too dark, and several subplots felt rushed or shoehorned in. I'm not saying this was a perfect film, nor am I suggesting its critics are in some way wrong. This is divisive for a reason - it's a flawed movie, and releasing it on Disney+ rather than the theaters was probably a smart move.</p><p>But for everything wrong with it, there's a great deal that works and - in my opinion - justifies going through the trouble of making yet another Peter Pan movie, which is no small feat in own right. Unlike most Disney classics the studios been recycling, there's no shortage of attempts to reboot Peter Pan as a modern fantasy. We had Hook in the '90s, the 2003 version from P. J. Hogan, and the 2015 movie from Joe Wright. I still have a soft spot for Hook, but its flaws make this version's seem trivial in comparison. I should probably give the 2003 version a rewatch - I was extremely disappointed when I saw it in the theaters and haven't returned since. As for the 2015 movie, it's easily the worst of the bunch and still serves as one of my go-to examples for mismanaged blockbusters. Frankly, the attempts to make Peter Pan work in modern movies mirror those that have plagued Robin Hood and King Arthur - these are concepts that <i>should</i> still work, but after a while it starts to feel like Hollywood is incapable of getting them right.</p><p>But Peter Pan & Wendy threads the needle - for me at least - by drawing inspiration from some of the source material's strongest aspects that are almost uniformly overlooked for being too dark. This is the first version I've come across that's at least willing to explore Barrie's dissection of the idea innocence is inherently good. It's unwilling to fully embrace the dark aspects of his work and depict all children as inherently cruel, but it takes Hook's suggestion to that effect seriously. For me, that's enough to establish this as movie worth seeing.</p><p>But it wasn't enough for David Lowery apparently, because there's a lot more to recommend here. The casting is absolutely fantastic (Alexander Molony was particularly good, but I was impressed with all the kids), and the movie offers some real gravitas at key moments. And while there are sequences where the combination of effects and visuals fail to sell what's on screen, there are others where we're treated to something special (the flying pirate ship at the end looked great).</p><p><br /></p><p><b>27. Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny</b></p><p>This was, of course, a particularly divisive film. For a lot of people, that opening section was a dealbreaker, which I certainly understand. Personally, I found it at once technically impressive but emotionally empty - I sort of compartmentalized the disconnect, focused on the pulpy adventure, and was able to keep it from ruining the experience for me. That said, if I'd seen this unaware it was destined to flop, I'm not sure I'd have been able to ignore the fact the lead was largely a digital creation in that sequence and still enjoy the rest of the film.</p><p>But luckily I was watching this on Disney+ and not in a theater, so I had the hindsight of knowing Disney's trial run of using CG to bottle stars and freeze their IP went over like a WWII bomber with a ballista bolt through an engine. If anything it was kind of delightful watching one of history's most cynical studio experiments crash and burn in slow motion, so I wasn't bothered.</p><p>At any rate, studio executives take note: no one gives a shit about digital actors masquerading as the real deal.</p><p>I thought the rest of the movie was solid for what it was - a fairly silly (if slightly overlong) adventure, coupled with a decent father-daughter (well, god-daughter, but it's all the same template) character story. The action was fun enough, with the caveat it was virtually impossible to buy into the idea a man in his '80s was actually capable of anything Jones is doing. But this franchise has always required a suspension of disbelief, and Mangold does good work setting up the intricate Rube Goldberg set pieces these movies require.</p><p>This isn't in the same league as the original three, of course, but I never really expected it would be. Despite bringing back Ford one last time (unless, God forbid, Disney decides they need to try the whole "legacy sequel" thing a third time sometime in the late 2030s), this feels more akin to something like Solo than, say, The Force Awakens or Last Jedi. And my feelings towards Dial of Destiny are fairly similar to my feelings towards Solo: I enjoyed watching both, but not so much I have any trouble putting myself into the shoes of those who hate them.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>26. Skull Island, Season 1</b></p><p>I sincerely hope whoever's in charge of the next Monsterverse movie watches this and pays close attention to how the characters are written, because this is the first thing in this franchise I've seen where I wanted <b>more</b> time with the humans.</p><p>Granted, this is an animated show, rather than a live-action movie, so the rules are a little different, but I'm convinced the basic concept would translate: make the people effective pulp adventurers. And also make them completely unhinged.</p><div>That last part's important - these things are more interesting when the people are running towards the monsters than away. The movies have typically tried to contrive plot-based reasons necessitating characters to move towards the action - they need some MacGuffin or something - but that gets old fast. The truth is we're watching these things because <b>we</b> love the monsters, and it's far more entertaining when the POV characters share our affection. </div><p>All that said, I should probably note Skull Island isn't exactly a kaiju series - it's more a comedy/adventure with a couple kaiju tossed into the mix. You could honestly write out Kong with only slight alterations to the overall plot, and if anything the show might be a little better for it.</p><p>But would anyone have seen it? Would I? Probably not, given the volume of entertainment out there, and that would have been a shame because this really was a great deal of fun. The show's breakout character, Annie, a teenage girl raised among monsters, is more than enough to make this worthwhile. Really, all the characters are likeable, including several you'd expect to be otherwise. This show plays with and subverts your expectations.</p><p>By the time we build up to the episodes about King Kong - which are still pretty great - I find myself wishing we were still focusing on the main characters. That's pretty damn impressive, if you ask me. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>25. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, Season 2</b></p><p>You have no idea how many spots this jumped solely because of the Lower Decks crossover. Like, take your best guess, then double it. God, I love that episode.</p><p>The season as a whole is pretty good, too, though it's still not what I really want. Personally, I want this show to be the version of Star Trek that <i>wasn't</i> made in the 60's, with as much as that entails as possible. I want the ship to look like it did, I want the characters to act like they acted in the original series, and most of all I want the structure to be episodic adventures with character development a secondary consideration.</p><p>And there is absolutely nothing wrong with not giving me what I want, particularly because if they did the series probably wouldn't have maintained enough fans to justify even a second season.</p><p>Instead, they're essentially taking plot elements and character traits implied in the original and adding in copious amounts of fan service, to the degree some elements are essentially fan fiction. And, just so we're clear, that is <b>not</b> a criticism. If anything, it's a smart approach that justifies revisiting characters like Spock and Uhura in the first place.</p><p>But because it's not what I personally want, this is as far up the list as it gets, despite the fact the aforementioned crossover is probably my favorite standalone live-action episode of Star Trek since DS9's Trials and Tribble-ations.</p><p>This might have made it a few spots higher still if it weren't for the musical episode leaving me a little cold. The songs were good, and the production values were impressive, but I just didn't feel like it delivered a premise and story that intertwined Star Trek and the format as well as it could have.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>24. Good Omens 2</b></p><p>The second season of Good Omens - to the limited extent the term "season" applies - is very different than the first. That shouldn't be entirely surprising: the first season was an adaptation of the novel by Gaiman and Pratchett, while the second was a new story inspired by the show and its leads. Because of this, the sequel feels like it's set in an entirely different world, one that's notably less dangerous and where even the denizens of hell tend to be a bit nicer in the long run. The first season was sort of a metaphysical satire, while this leaned towards romantic comedy. In context, it almost feels like fan fiction (and seems to borrow freely from tropes associated with that genre).</p><p>Not only is there's nothing wrong with that, it was probably the best approach. The first season didn't need a sequel, so trying to match the tone and style would have likely resulted in something redundant. Focusing instead on implied character facets and relationships offered the freedom to actually deliver something different.</p><p>And what we got was a funny, engaging, breezy story about angels and demons navigating a cold war between heaven and hell while falling in love. Did part of me wish they'd leaned a little more into the serious side of the genre? Maybe - this isn't my ideal mix of tones - but I still found the whole thing pretty delightful.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>23. Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves</b></p><p>I like Honor Among Thieves a great deal, but maybe not quite as much as I expected to. Yeah, this is partly another case of unreasonable expectations setting the bar too high, but - for everything the movie does right (and there's a great deal of that) - there are also some missed opportunities.</p><p>This is at its best when it embraces madcap heist antics in its world, but - despite being centered on precisely those kinds of characters - the movie underutilizes those genre elements. It wants to be a comedic Mission: Impossible movie set in Forgotten Realms, but it keeps pausing this to explore its fantasy roots. To be fair, some of that's great, too - the jokes and Easter Eggs were a lot of fun, and the tongue-in-cheek generic fantasy score might by the film's best asset (I'm not joking when I say I want the score nominated for an Oscar) - but the reason this hits me like a three-and-a-half star movie rather than four or five comes down to it treating what should be its primary genre as a side thought.</p><p>Likewise, I felt like the movie's balance of comedy and serious moments was a little off. The Disney+ Willow show struck a very similar tone, and managed to pull it off quite a bit better, in my opinion, delivering moments that had actual weight. The scene where Pine's character reveals the missing piece of his backstory gives us a taste of that, but the film's ending struck me as kind of childish and formulaic. That's not to say the writing and direction was at all bad; just that it could have been a lot better during crucial moments.</p><p>And again, I still really enjoyed this. The whole cast was great, with Michelle Rodriguez and Sophia Lillis standing out. The action sequences were fantastically inventive, as well, and the high speed polymorphing chase was absolutely delightful. If the choice comes down to more installments exactly like this or nothing at all, make no mistake: I'll take as much of this as they're willing to give me. But if they can punch this up a bit, the blueprint they're using has the potential to be something truly special.</p><p>Let's just hope the lackluster box-office numbers didn't sink the chances of any follow-ups.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>22. Cocaine Bear</b></p><p>Every decision this movie makes is right. That sentence, coupled with the premise of the movie (which is already succinctly summed up in its name) would serve as a complete review, so feel free to skip the rest of this if you've got anything better to do.</p><p>The wisest decision director Elizabeth Banks makes here is not to try and elevate the material or turn this into anything more than the sum of its parts. Cocaine Bear isn't a cautionary tale about climate change, a thoughtful deconstruction of failed US drug policy, or a surprisingly impactful emotional exploration of any of its characters. It is instead exactly what's advertised, and I think that's commendable.</p><p>Specifically, this is a comedy, albeit one with escalating degrees of gore. It's a throwback to old b-horror with a higher budget, actual production values, and a sense of self-awareness. It wants to recreate the thrill of watching a laughably bad movie while actually being good. To this end, Banks casts comedians and has them play 2-dimensional characters, none of whom get enough screen time to build up any real empathetic connection.</p><p>Again, these are features, not bugs. The point is to avoid lasting attachment or emotional connection that undercuts the silly fun of the thing. Structurally, this is closer to parodies of the '80s and '90s, albeit with enough love for the genre being targeted to qualify as an installment rather than lampooning them. Also, unlike most of those, Cocaine Bear is actually funny.</p><p>It's essentially a near-perfect execution of a very simple, intentionally stupid premise. It would be easy to dismiss this as a movie that sets out with modest ambitions and achieves them, but that ignores the fact that there are so few movies like this that are any good. There's an art to turning a ridiculous premise into a fun movie that's not just an overlong trailer, and while Cocaine Bear makes it look easy, it requires intricately balanced genre conventions, a wry sense of humor, and careful planning. This is worth checking out, assuming you can handle a bit of gore.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>21. Transformers: Rise of the Beasts</b></p><p>It's difficult to say whether or not Rise of the Beasts actually clears the bar to count as a good movie or not. For the record, I think it does, albeit barely, though frankly it's difficult to care.</p><p>Before you interpret that as a criticism, let's take a moment and remember this is the sequel to the prequel (which may or may not be a reboot) to five movies by Michael Bay based on a cartoon show based on toys, but also based on a sequel cartoon series from the '90s that was simultaneously sillier and thematically darker.</p><p>The point is, "ridiculous and fun" should be the goal here, more than "good." Bumblebee did pull off a pretty incredible feat and deliver a truly great movie on top of everything else, but it'd be unreasonable to expect them to repeat that. And of course this isn't on par with its immediate predecessor, but damn if it isn't a joy to watch.</p><p>I enjoyed this one a lot, and not just because I've got find memories of watching Beast Machines with friends in the hall lounge in college.</p><p>But that certainly doesn't hurt.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>20. Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania</b></p><p>I know this is one of the Marvel installments that's widely derided, but as a retro fantasy adventure with some great comedic beats and a genuinely unnerving antagonist, I really liked it. The movie is inventive and weird, with visuals that prioritize imagination over realism. In a sense, this feels like Marvel's answer to Aquaman more than anything else, and - in my book at least - that's a good thing.</p><p>I can nitpick various aspects, of course. Some jokes land better than others, not every character arc connects, and they may have pushed some of the intentionally silly effects a little too far (everyone gets that M.O.D.O.K. looking like an effect composited using '90s technology was a choice, right?), but at the end of the day this delivers what I feel has been missing from most of the last round of MCU productions: new, bizarre, imaginative worlds. The MCU's main danger at this point is feeling stale, which is why I suspect a lot of the Phase 4 movies haven't landed the same way, despite being more or less on par with earlier installments in terms of quality. Quantumania succeeds in shaking things up and showing us something different and truly bizarre, and it does so with whimsical characters, cool action, and great jokes.</p><p>More please.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>19. Creed III</b></p><p>Creed III isn't as good as the first Creed. It's also not as good as Citizen Kane, Casablanca, or The Godfather.</p><p>Shocking, I know.</p><p>But if we're through comparing it to movies nothing should ever be compared to, maybe it's worth noting this is incredibly well made, the performances are all fantastic, the characters' journeys are effective, and the surreal fight sequence was damn near perfect.</p><p>In a lot of ways, Creed III was a smaller movie than its predecessors - the stakes feel more reined in, the story is less epic, and the ending has a lighter touch. The downside of this is that it doesn't leave as big an impression as, say, Creed II, but that doesn't mean it's not an improvement (and Creed II was already pretty good).</p><p>I really like this one. Of course it isn't as good as Creed, but then again not a lot of movies are. But this closes out the trilogy (or at least first three films of whatever this turns into) strong, which is a hell of an achievement in its own right.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>18. The Holdovers</b></p><p>Got this in just under the wire! The Holdovers is a great film, and one of this year's best examples of a movie poorly served by the framing of this kind of list. By it's nature, The Holdovers isn't the kind of movie most people - myself included - are going to be knocked head-over-heels over. If you're better versed in 70's cinema than I am, you might disagree, but for the rest of us this is more a movie we appreciate and enjoy than fall deeply in love with.</p><p>That's not a criticism, just an explanation for why a movie that's damn near perfect is only scraping the top third of a list arranged according to the admittedly vague concept of "favorite." The Holdovers is a film that prioritizes simple, grounded moments over big, dramatic gestures. It's got a lot of heart and a great sense of humor, but it's wants you to ache rather than cry and chuckle rather than fall out of your seat. Everything about the movie is as intentionally muted as the color palette, including payoffs and emotional beats. It's a measured film that deserves the accolades it's receiving and whatever awards are coming its way. I only hope the inevitable Oscar nominations offer the filmmakers some consolation over not being ranked higher on some random nerd's end-of-year list.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>17. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem</b></p><p>The fact this isn't a serious contender for best animated picture is a reminder of just how good the medium has gotten. Everything about this movie is great, starting with the phenomenal animation style, which transforms sketch marks, smudged ink, and paint into a three-dimensional world. Sure, it's a continuation of the philosophy driving Spider-Verse and Mitchells Vs. the Machines, but it takes that in a new and unique direction. Animation has rarely looked this cool.</p><p>On top of that, the movie offers fantastic, reimagined versions of the characters, great comedy, and real heart. This is a wonderful movie - everything you could ask for from an animated picture and more. But the bar for best animated movie of the year seems to have risen to the level of "transcendent," and I don't think Mutant Mayhem quite clears that hurdle.</p><p>Though, honestly, it comes close at times.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>16. Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3</b></p><p>If you'd given me six guesses before I watched the movie as to how many Guardians would die, you'd have gotten six wrong answers. Maybe it's because Gunn kept insisting this would be the absolute finale for this version of the team, maybe it's because Dave Bautista was adamant he wouldn't be back, or maybe it's because the first two installments end with an emotional sacrifice, but I'd have bet money not everyone was walking away.</p><p>But I kind of think that's the reason they did. Gunn seems a little more self-conscious of his writing patterns than most people making these kinds of movies, so maybe he took the less obvious path to avoid being predictable. Regardless, he delivers a emotionally fulfilling conclusion without relying on what's become the genre's default dramatic shortcut. Likewise, while it may have cost him a bit among critics, Gunn shies away from some of the supposed pacing and structural rules dominating Hollywood blockbusters. </p><p>And, of course, the movie's also as fun as a barrel of raccoons. The weird settings, inventive action, and quirky humor are all dialed up about as far as they'll go. The giant space organism is gnarly and gleefully gross, the villain is terrifying, and Knowhere just keeps getting cooler. These are among the best looking superhero movies out there.</p><p>I can understand why this one's divisive, but count me among those who think Vol. 3 is a worthy successor to the franchise. I'm sorry we won't see more Guardians movies from Gunn, but damned if I'm not looking forward to whatever he's got planned for Superman and the rest of the DC Universe.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>15. Bottoms</b></p><p>I dug this bizarre comedy, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a tad disappointed after hearing it hyped for months. Don't get me wrong: it's hilarious and entertaining as hell, and I love the way it blends a style of comedy from the 80's and 90's with the sensibilities of the present. I also love the fact this gives Heathers a run for its money as far as body counts are concerned - I'm not sure why zany teenage comedies are better when people die violently, but the rule of thumb seems to have held.</p><p>As entertaining as this is, it doesn't have much to say beyond the inherent statement it makes by existing in the first place (which, to be clear, is still quite a powerful statement). Not that it needs to deliver some kind of thesis or anything to be good, mind you. Comedies need to be funny, which this absolutely is. Plus it includes a sequence in which a bunch of teenage girls fight a football team to the death, which is of course icing on the cake.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>14. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/12/merry-little-batman-2023.html">Merry Little Batman</a></b></p><p>Remarkably good, this is one of two animated movie on this list we almost didn't get to see due to studio mergers and subsequent executive meddling. Merry Little Batman certainly isn't like any incarnation of the character in prior adaptations and - to be frank - is a long way from the version I'd have described wanting next. But there's no arguing with results: everything about this from the comedy to the surprisingly effective emotional core just works. This one's really good.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>13. Willow, Season 1</b></p><p>I realize I've said this before, but it's true here, as well: three or four episodes in, I was convinced this was going to make it to the top of my year-end list, only for the show to come up short in the second half of the season. This time, it's a little complicated, however, as I either wanted more or less from the series. I better elaborate.</p><p>Willow is ultimately a campy, ridiculous adventure that refreshingly refuses to treat its predecessor as some sort of hallowed, serious masterpiece. The movie it's based on, if we're being honest, has some serious tonal issues: half of it is kind of dark and bleak, while the other half is basically a farce. When I heard they were making a legacy sequel, I naturally assumed it'd be the serious stuff getting highlighted. Instead, the show leaned into the absurdity of the world and characters. It's not entirely comedy, but tonally that's the aspect that wins out. And the series is much better for it.</p><p>But unsurprisingly, it's still trying to inject pathos into its characters and story. I'm not certain whether Avatar: The Last Airbender was an influence on the show's development, but I wouldn't be surprised - it really feels like it's trying for a similar effect where the humor gets you invested in characters, only to make their emotional pain all the more impactful.</p><p>It's a really good approach. The problem is, it doesn't quite pull it off here. I like these characters, but their arcs kind of feel like they're meandering, their growth largely feels forced and simplistic, and their pain comes across muted. The cast is doing good work, but the larger stories the show's telling needed work. I'm hesitant to come down too harshly on the writers, because the same team did stellar work building the characters to begin with, to say nothing of delivering some truly delightful dialogue. But if this wanted to be "more than a comedy," I wanted better arcs than we got.</p><p>Alternatively, maybe this shouldn't try so hard. That's why I said at the start I wanted either more or less: I think this would work if it just dropped the pretense of pathos and embraced the "friendship is magic" side of the franchise. Willow delivers a line to more or less that effect at one point, and it's a satisfying moment. There's nothing wrong with something like this being a little childish.</p><p>Nitpicks aside, I absolutely enjoyed this and wish we were getting more.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>12. Lower Decks, Season 4</b></p><p>The downside to ranking a show that's as consistently good as Lower Decks is that it isn't likely to surprise you after a while. Yet again Lower Decks delivered something wonderful. I loved every episode and had a blast. But because it really has been consistently good, it really doesn't have any room to astonish me. That's not a problem, but it does mean there's a roof on how high it's going to climb on this kind of list.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>11. Poker Face</b></p><div dir="auto">It's fascinating to see a throwback to classic, episodic mystery series appear in the present landscape of intricately plotted shows driven by season- or series-long arcs. For the record, I'm a believer that neither approach is inherently good or bad. Ideally, showrunners should adopt the format best for each show, but that's clearly not a given: I've lost track of the number of shows I've seen in the last decade which blatantly followed in Stranger Things' footprints because of some mandate rather than artistic choice. If the only thing Poker Face accomplishes is getting us a little closer to a world where artistic decisions are made for artistic reasons, it would already be worth it.</div><div dir="auto"><p>But if course that's far from the show's only merit. Poker Face offers quirky humor, genuine suspense, and an endless supply of fun. The episodes vary in quality, but that's to be expected. Frankly, it's nice to be constantly surprised, even if the surprise in question occasionally turns out to be some variation of "this episode is good but not great."</p></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">And the great episodes are REALLY great. On top of that, the best two of the season (in my opinion, at least) were near the end, implying the trajectory is on the right course.</div></div><p><br /></p><p><b>10. The Muppets Mayhem</b></p><p>I want to be a little careful while comparing this against other Muppet productions, because it's a little too easy to trip up and undersell some phenomenal installments from the last few decades. I'm not certain this is the <b>best</b> Muppet production of the past few decades, or even necessarily my favorite (I'd at least need to re-watch both the 2011 movie and 2015 series to rank the three). The stance I am prepared to make is a bit more specific: I think this understands the underlying concept of the Muppets better than any show, movie, or special since we lost Henson. The approach here is pitch-perfect, even on episodes where jokes and relationships don't entirely connect.</p><p>What's particularly interesting to me is that it gets to that point by dialing back the franchise's manic energy and edgy content. Rather than treating The Muppets like a larger-than-life concept with bizarre metaphysical properties, it just kind of approaches them as characters. Weird characters, of course, but still characters, with insecurities, hopes, and failings. It's the opposite approach I'd have expected or would have thought I'd want for a series exclusively about the Electric Mayhem, but now I find myself wanting similar spin-offs about as many classic Muppet characters as they're willing to produce.</p><p>I'll add that the best installments - episodes 5 through 8, if I'm remembering right - were absolutely phenomenal. If every episode had been as good as those, this would be in the top three; if they'd all been at the quality of episode 7, this would have handed in the #1 spot. But few shows if any can maintain that level of quality, particularly right out of the gate, and it's not like the rest of the series was ever short of "really good."</p><p>Please give me more like this. Not necessarily more of this specific series (though I'd take more Mayhem if it's in the cards), but more Muppets produced with this philosophy. This really feels right.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>9. Blue Beetle</b></p><p>By my count, there are five truly great movies in the now defunct DCEU: Wonder Woman, Birds of Prey, Shazam!, The Suicide Squad, and - you guessed it - Blue Beetle. I really wasn't expecting that, by the way, which is why it took me so long to actually see it (December 26th, in case you were wondering). Blue Beetle has its diehard proponents, but the overall consensus is fairly lackluster. Well, count me among the proponents: I loved it.</p><p>Granted, I may have been partly swayed by the movie's decision to heavily homage Speed Racer throughout the first act. And while, yes, the Amblin vibe of the third act is getting a bit passé, its execution here felt fresh.</p><p>Was the movie flawless? Of course not. It's bizarre the movie never circled back to the widespread devastation caused by the suit's "power test" (I'm guessing there was supposed to be a scene establishing the villain was able to use that to get authorization for her assault on the family - maybe it'll be on the blu-ray I just ordered). Also, a few of the fart and butt jokes were a tad childish, even for a family movie. </p><p>But between the humor, a fantastic cast of characters, and some inventive action sequences, this was an unusually good entry in the genre that felt offbeat enough to stand out.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>8. The Sacrifice Game</b></p><p>I'll put a full write-up on Mainlining Christmas at some point (probably next year, unless I get ambitious), but for the time being I'll say this retro '70s horror throwback with a '90s goth twist is my favorite 2023 Christmas movie to date. While that represents a fairly light sampling, this also ranks pretty well overall. I don't want to spoil any more than necessary here, but I will say I couldn't have loved the ending any more - that goes for the third act in general and the resolution in particular (I'm sure the latter will be at least a bit divisive, but - yeah - I just loved it).</p><p>That said, those of you who are squeamish or easily disturbed by violent imagery will want to <a href="https://www.doesthedogdie.com/media/893386">do your due diligence</a> before watching.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>7. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2023/04/finale-frontier-extravaganza.html">Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur, Season 1</a></b></p><p>God, I love this. The show is beautifully designed, lovingly written and animated, and the music... honestly, those musical interludes might be my favorite part of this. I'm kind of struggling for things to say here, because what makes this work is hard to put into words. It's a fun, superhero comedy/drama in the vein of the Spider-Verse movies and the DuckTales reboot. It's stylish, smart, and funny. If you haven't checked this out already, there's no time like the present to correct that.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>6. Polite Society</b></p><p>Polite Society kind of feels like the movie Edgar Wright would make, if he'd made movies about women back in his "ridiculous action phase". It feels more like Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World than any other movie I can think of.</p><p>Please don't mistake that some sort of criticism or accusation of redundancy - Polite Society arrives at its tone and style through an entirely different set of genre references and ideas, and the story is completely different. But if you're looking for a reference point, Scott Pilgrim is about as close as you're going to get.</p><p>That said, I like this a lot more than Wright's video-game fueled movie (sidenote: I haven't seen the animated series yet, but I hear it's fantastic). I know it's sacrilege to speak ill of Pilgrim, but while I love the style and approach, something feels off in the way the absurdist action is woven in. Polite Society, for me at least, does a far better job balancing this and selling the transitions between slightly heightened realism and bonkers martial arts sequences.</p><p>Which, incidentally, are absolutely delightful, beautiful, and about as fun as this stuff gets. There are a couple counterexamples (a few sequences near the are a tad underwhelming), but on the whole this is some of the best action you're likely to see this year.</p><p>The underlying comedy is pretty great, too. The characters, like the movie they inhabit, are bigger and weirder than life. And, as a bonus, the fact the story centers on a cast of primarily British Pakistani characters means we get to see something different than any of the templates we've gotten a thousand times before.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>5. Barbie</b></p><p>Movie critics have come a long way in the last fifteen years. That's how long it's been since Speed Racer came out and was largely lampooned by reviewers who, frankly, just didn't get it. Distracted by surface-level observations of bright colors and comic relief, they approached it like any other kids' movie, and because of this overlooked the depth of artistry, web of influences, and overall achievement the film represented.</p><p>This generation of critics is apparently more open to the possibility that art exists in unlikely places. Audiences are, too - Barbie grossed close to 1.5 billion worldwide.</p><p>I'm not sure if Barbie is <i>quite</i> as good as Speed Racer - I'll need to rewatch it several times over a few years to see how it holds up. But I do think that's the closest reference we've got: like the Wachowski sisters' masterpiece, Gerwig's film builds a world out of a collage of pop-art imagery, calibrated color, and music. She takes a slightly different path: Speed Racer invokes its more impressionistic elements visually, while Gerwig favors more elaborate story structure to reach a similar end point. But both movies offer surreal experiences reminiscent of cubism (the Wachowskis have cited the movement as an influence; I suspect Gerwig turned to it as well).</p><p>The only thing holding this back for me is the movie's decision to explain its references. To be clear, I don't think this is a flaw: Barbie needs to be accessible to a wide audience, including children (especially children, in fact). Pausing to explain various incarnations of the doll or Ruth Handler's identity was almost certainly the right choice. In addition, Gerwig found ways to deliver information that were comical and contributed to the sense the film was pushing the medium in directions that are alien to generic blockbusters. But I've got a history with toy collecting, so - fair or not - I did find those moments a tad distracting. </p><p>Regardless, this is a fantastic movie and yet another reminder that Gretta Gerwig is one of the most exciting directors working today. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>4. They Cloned Tyrone</b></p><p>One of the year's most fascinating releases, They Cloned Tyrone is the rare kind of multi-layered movies that's simultaneously a pleasure to watch and is deceptively complex to break down. Even on the surface, it plays as a fun cross-genre homage to '70s exploitation and science-fiction, with modern comedic sensibilities and thoughtful satire. And, again, that's the <i>surface</i> level.</p><p>Because it's also a masterclass in deconstructing the genres it's paying homage to, recontextualizing tropes and character archetypes as the story progresses in ways that add layered meaning to what previously seemed like jokes. This should be in consideration for Best Original Screenplay - it's a brilliant script.</p><p>On top of that, it features some fantastic performances (particularly from its three leads), a perfect soundtrack, and retro '70s cinematography tying it all together. I loved every minute of this weird, intricately constructed movie and look forward to whatever Juel Taylor directs next.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>TOP 3</b></p><p><i>Okay, I want to take minute and acknowledge how close these three actually are. The things that follow aren't just those I loved - they all left me breathless, either from laughing, from being emotionally moved, or from sheer shock that the medium I was seeing was delivering work of this caliber. For months I was planning on cheating with a two-way tie, using the fact one was a TV show as justification. But that plan fell apart when a new challenger emerged and squeezed between them. That's how goddamn close this is - the movie in the #2 spot forced me to split the win between #3 and #1.</i></p><p><i>So, with that in mind, here are the three pieces of entertainment from 2023 I loved most ranked in as accurate a manner as I can muster.</i></p><p><br /></p><p><b>3. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2023/04/finale-frontier-extravaganza.html">Star Trek: Picard, Season 3</a></b></p><p>This was one of the best seasons of television I've seen in my entire life. Everything about it, from the writing, directing, editing, acting, and scoring was executed at a level <i>movies</i> should aspire to. The premise required a cast of actors in their '70s and '80s to behave like action heroes, and it never once felt absurd - that alone is a hell of a feat.</p><p>The tone was tense and suspenseful, the visuals epic and engrossing, and the new villain was the best the franchise has given us since Ricardo Montalban graced the screen. The first four episodes in particular felt unrelenting and as close to perfect as anything I've ever seen produced for the small screen. The rest of the season wavered a hair... but only a hair. Taken as a whole, this is the best Trek I've seen since the Original Series. I'm in absolute awe of what was accomplished here.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>2. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse</b></p><p>I enjoyed the first installment in this series well enough, and more than that I was able to clearly see that it was a quantum leap forward in animation. It's a great movie, no question, but I didn't love it the way a lot of comics and animation nerds did. </p><p>This one hit me differently. This time I felt the way the first movie's most passionate fans described feeling. I love every second of this movie.</p><p>It deserves that love, incidentally. The animation here is incredible. It's kind of become cliché to describe modern animated movies as still works of art brought to life, but... God, that's the feeling. Backgrounds and foregrounds alike transform seamlessly between two and three-dimensions depending on the emotional needs of the moment, designs break through boundaries of medium, and the story has weight and resonance. It's fantastic.</p><p>But honestly I care more about how it made me feel, and it's almost impossible to overstate just how much I enjoyed watching this film. The energy and momentum were palpable, and the experience left me overjoyed.</p><p>I know some people are annoyed it's basically half a story, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm not convinced the old rules regarding structure and self-contained installments really apply anymore now that we're in a world where it's relatively easy to catch up on earlier films or even skim the synopsis on Wikipedia. Frankly, if you've got a story that needs two movies worth of time to play out, I'm fine with having it span two movies. And I can't imagine anyone claiming Across the Spider-Verse was stretched out: every second felt justified. </p><p>This one came so close to the top spot. Hell, I genuinely enjoyed it just as much as everything on here. But in the end, I couldn't justify a tie between two animated movies, so I went with something that meant a hair more to me. But damned it was close....</p><p><br /></p><p><b>1. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2023/07/movie-review-nimona.html">Nimona</a></b></p><p>What's exceptional about Nimona isn't that it's doing anything particularly new - the character archetypes, plot structure, and even themes are pretty similar to those we've seen countless times in modern animation, and even the fantasy/sci-fi setting is becoming commonplace. Despite that, the movie feels fresh and revolutionary, because while the underlying ideas have been played with before, Nimona leaves you with the sense everything's been turned up to 11.</p><p>Some of that's due to the punk aesthetic and the movie's willingness to at least poke at the limits of its rating. There's a mischievousness to some of the dialogue you don't expect from these (think Shrek, only smart and funny). It also helps the movie knows when to draw back the curtain around its metaphors: it's not afraid to acknowledge some of the darker aspects of what its characters are going through, and the emotions actually carry some weight.</p><p>But mostly it's just that it's all done as well as it is. </p><p>That's not really why this is up here, though. The real asset of the movie is right in its title: it's Nimona herself.</p><p>The character feels genuinely revolutionary. Every line of dialogue she utters packs a punch - we're so used to these characters being watered down it's truly refreshing to hear her talk gleefully about murdering her enemies and overthrowing the government. And it's also more fun than I've had watching a movie in a long, long time.</p><p>Nimona is an absolute joy, and we're lucky to have it. Very lucky, in fact - it was nearly lost in the midst of Disney's acquisition of Fox, a reminder that studios aren't motivated by art. Nor are they good at business: Disney could have made a fortune releasing this under their brand, and whatever blowback they hoped to avoid by writing it off hit them nonetheless (once more for the cheap seats: YOU CANNOT APPEASE FASCISTS).</p><p>It's that victory in a meta-conceptual sense that edges this one over the line for me, incidentally, into this spot. Both this and Spider-Verse are, in very different ways, incredible artistic achievements, but the path this went through to overcome bigotry and corporate cowardice makes its themes resonate all the louder.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>CLOSING THOUGHTS</b></p><p>This year, even more than most, I'm left with a sprawling list of movies I didn't get around to. Hell, in some cases I'm literally left with the movies themselves: I've got blu-rays of Fast X, the next Mission Impossible, Asteroid City, and others I picked up on sale in November and just haven't had a chance to watch. And those are on top of a growing list of independent and foreign films I hear great things about. And I haven't even mentioned movies still in theaters such as The Marvels, The Boy and the Heron, and Godzilla Minus One. Or all the TV shows I didn't get to....</p><p>So, yeah, this isn't entirely a complete list, nor will it ever be. But it's as close as I was able to scrape together before the end of a busy year.</p><p>The standouts for me in 2023 so far were of course animated films. I should note that animated movies have an advantage in that I'm less likely to overlook them before the end of the year: because there are fewer released, the great ones rarely escape my notice. It's entirely possible I'll stumble across a new favorite in the coming months, the way I found Vesper last January. Regardless, I remain excited by the revolution we're seeing in animation. New animation styles keep pushing boundaries and merging mediums to fantastic effect. I really hope this continues evolving in new directions.</p><p>It'll also be interesting to see where television goes, though I suspect we're coming to the end of the era of unlimited ambitious programming. Streaming executives finally seem to have caught on to the fact they can't make money by producing infinite content competing against a slew of other studios doing the same, as there's no reason for anyone to pay for more than one subscription at a time. So everyone is finally pulling back on expenses, which... okay, that's probably more sustainable. My hope is that they'll focus on producing a smaller number of great shows. My fear is they'll focus on mass-producing cheap reality TV. Guess we'll have to wait and see what wins out.</p><p>2024 will probably be a light year in terms of Hollywood, as we'll see the aftereffects of the strikes. Perhaps we'll see more foreign films brought in to take up the slack now that they've demonstrated an appeal to American audiences. That would be a nice change of pace, as would more independent and low-budget genre pictures getting better distribution.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-34387329628235149602023-07-02T20:25:00.005-07:002023-07-02T20:25:43.597-07:00Movie Review: Nimona<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK4VfGdqhXrSjUB3eZGRwKqzhpewt2BGDThcM-F9FCbcpzQVgaZlRKbgrlq0iGxxxlnLPoWWFJeVOO8vzk8k1hy1msBSV_O6qVKsi2mrTqm4ntO7gbfFmYXmvy69ehL0Q_eZgHiPT8JUxf9dDjhPwcuyMBsVpG8eaa-eBFITr071fslkcjTaY9_3DxEKtt/s3051/PXL_20230703_032252842.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2678" data-original-width="3051" height="281" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK4VfGdqhXrSjUB3eZGRwKqzhpewt2BGDThcM-F9FCbcpzQVgaZlRKbgrlq0iGxxxlnLPoWWFJeVOO8vzk8k1hy1msBSV_O6qVKsi2mrTqm4ntO7gbfFmYXmvy69ehL0Q_eZgHiPT8JUxf9dDjhPwcuyMBsVpG8eaa-eBFITr071fslkcjTaY9_3DxEKtt/s320/PXL_20230703_032252842.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>This is going to be more a rant than a review, because... well, frankly my thoughts on the artistic aspects of this movie are less complicated than my thoughts about the business end. Note I said less <b>complicated</b>, not less intense. But if you follow me on any of 6 social media platforms (unfortunately I'm not exaggerating - for the love of God, can something just replace Twitter already?), you already know I love the hell out of this movie.</p><p>So let's get a little of that out of the way. This is good. Strike that - great. Strike that, too - this is <b>metal</b>. The comedy isn't just hilarious, it's hilarious in ways family and kids movies never are, because Hollywood executives don't have the guts to follow through. This movie is what every "edgy" kids movie for the last 20 years has been cosplaying as, but this time the tone is coming from a real place of anger, and everything from the style to the writing to the voice acting convey that in every frame. This is the best animated feature I've seen in a long time. It's funny, emotionally resonant, and the titular character is the stuff of legends. It features meaningful representation that's interwoven into the themes and premise. It's a phenomenal film, and the only reason it's not a 10/10 is because the dial goes up to 11. In case it's not clear, I am recommending you head over to Netflix right now to watch this, and if anyone tries to stop you from doing so, you should knock them unconscious and shove their unconscious body in the trunk of a stolen car.</p><p>So if it's that good, why am I pissed off? Well, there are two reasons. First, Nimona kind of primes you to want to break something, but more importantly because....</p><p>We almost didn't get to see this. See, this movie was made by Blue Sky, which is another way of saying it was made by Fox. And that of course means it was passed off to Disney as part of the acquisition, and Disney's leadership took one look at the mostly completed film and decided they were better off shelving it. As far as I can tell, this came a hair's breadth from being written off the way Warner Bros./Discovery wrote off Batgirl.</p><p><i>(Side-note: fuck David Zaslav).</i></p><p>Sorry. Where were we?</p><p>Oh, yes. Disney was ready to throw out the nearly finished animated film, because they thought it made more sense than completing and releasing it. The main rumor for this seems centered on the movie's queer content. It's worth noting these decisions would have been made <i>prior </i>to Disney winding up the target of right-wing grifters going after the corporation.</p><p>Let that be a lesson to businesses - you can't placate bigots. If anything, they're <b>more</b> likely to come after you if they think you care what they think. Relative to other companies, Disney's a decade behind the times when it comes to lgbt+ representation in kids' media, but you don't see the right openly trying to weaponize government in retaliation against, say, Cartoon Network or Netflix (both of which have been far more progressive in this respect). If you reach out to bigots angry that gay or trans people exist, they take it as a sign of weakness and double their efforts.</p><p>Fortunately, enough people who believed in the project (i.e.: people with some goddamn clue what this movie actually was) convinced the right parties at Netflix and Disney there was a mutually beneficial solution, and a deal was struck. Like countless films before it, Nimona was sold, completed by Netflix, and released on that platform following a one-week limited release (almost certainly to qualify it for awards).</p><p>And, to be clear, I'm elated it was finished and released at all, which is more than I can say for several films caught in the Discovery-Warner Bros. merger (again, fuck David Zaslav). But, to be clear, it's infuriating it came close to not seeing the light. This movie is artistically valuable, will be deeply meaningful to a generation of kids who grow up with it, and - with apologies for belaboring the point - is rad as hell. It's virtually guaranteed a Best Animated Picture nomination.</p><p>Let that sink in for a second: a nearly-completed Oscar-caliber movie almost got trashed, because an executive thought it wouldn't be convenient to release it. What the hell is wrong with this industry?</p><p>But there's one silver lining of all this, for me at least: I don't own stock in Disney. Because if I did, I'd <b>really</b> be furious right now. So far, I've been focusing on the artistic and cultural aspects, but considered from a business context the decision is even more idiotic.</p><p>I'm pretty certain Disney just pissed away billions of dollars.</p><p>That's not an exaggeration. I think this movie, coupled with the right marketing campaign and (ironically) Disney's branding, could have been huge. Like, Frozen huge.</p><p>The title character in Nimona is basically a better version of Deadpool with a (sometimes literal) axe to grind against an uptight society that's essentially a blend of the default Disney fairytale kingdom, present day, and a touch of sci-fi. She's more transgressive than Shrek, and in ways that feel authentic rather than manufactured (because, again, the emotion that drove the creation of this character was authentic). As a result, the movie feels - and actually is - subversive. Oh, and she's a child, meaning she functions as a POV power fantasy for the key demographic.</p><p>Kids would have eaten this up with a spoon soaked in the milky blood of a cereal-breathing dragon. I'm sure the ones who find it on Netflix still will, and I have no doubt this will be a success for Netflix. But Netflix isn't built to capitalize on movies like this the way the House of Mouse is. If Disney had released it in the theaters with ads showcasing Nimona's gleeful bloodthirsty lines while playing up the fact she was going after a kingdom superficially resembling classic Disney (i.e.: actually delivering on that thing they've been half-assing in every other Disney movie of the past twenty years), they'd be dragging their parents to the theaters to see it an eighth time. They'd be selling a fifth talking Nimona doll asking who they wanted to kill to replace the fourth one confiscated by the school principal. Add in sequels and television shows, and my earlier estimate in the billions starts sounding conservative.</p><p>Disney pissed away good money (at a time they actually need it, for a change), because they were afraid they might offend the worst people in the country, and - because reality seems to have a sense of humor - those same people spent the last year fixated on destroying them anyway.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-76339804495066608232023-05-03T19:13:00.004-07:002023-05-03T19:13:57.102-07:00Movie Review: Peter Pan & Wendy<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmVgZmdkrerUv5V7Te1TCbdnVzkPs1zS1LE--lR1NVeEZoqYxnN78HIqiqaFjU7cJOp0kKXNk2i_ZJ5FSQbsRbdlCxU_1BgjsL2QLuOIICu563BpCI71AWP4aIosGrICiihs6LNNtVjTVv_2SzailNmYWU6fBsAbQKqkZQj6AJj7LNq8wy4FI4B86Jyw/s465/Pan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="348" data-original-width="465" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmVgZmdkrerUv5V7Te1TCbdnVzkPs1zS1LE--lR1NVeEZoqYxnN78HIqiqaFjU7cJOp0kKXNk2i_ZJ5FSQbsRbdlCxU_1BgjsL2QLuOIICu563BpCI71AWP4aIosGrICiihs6LNNtVjTVv_2SzailNmYWU6fBsAbQKqkZQj6AJj7LNq8wy4FI4B86Jyw/s320/Pan.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />I'm not entirely sure whether calling David Lowery's divisive new take on Peter Pan a remake is entirely accurate. Scenes and aspects are inspired by the 1953 animated film - they mimicked some of the flying sequences, for example - but setting aside superficial similarities, this is no closer to the story in that movie than it is to most of the other scores of live-action Pan films. The plot and characters have been overhauled, the source material revisited, and the result really is its own creation.<p></p><p>On its own, this isn't entirely surprising. The Disney "remakes" all exist on a spectrum between straight forward recreations and complete reimaginings. Or, to put it another way, you've got Beauty and the Beast and Lion King on one end and, Maleficent and Cruella on the other. Neither philosophy necessarily results in good or bad movies, though I tend to find the more extreme reworkings more interesting, regardless of quality. But while Dumbo and Jungle Book are both new stories, one is far, far better than the other (I trust I don't need to specify <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2016/04/movie-review-jungle-book.html">which</a> is <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2019/12/movies-revisited-2019.html">which</a>).</p><p>So the real question you're probably asking is where this falls on that spectrum: is it good or not? And the answer you'll get there depends on who you ask. I dropped the adjective "divisive" in the opening sentence for a reason - Peter Pan & Wendy seems to be eliciting a wide range of opinions.</p><p>For what it's worth, I loved it, for a host of reasons I'll get to in a moment. That said, this is also a case where I understand where the other side's coming from. At times, Peter Pan & Wendy feels like a movie that made simultaneously by a fantastic director and a committee of executives, with the former managing character moments and the latter ensuring a quota of reference shots and generic kid's fantasy adventure sequences made it into the finished product.</p><p>I have no idea whether that's what occurred here, but it wouldn't at all surprise me. There's a notable shift in tone and quality between, say, the generic London flight sequence lazily failing to recreate the feel of the animated film, and complex relationships and themes explored throughout. I found it pretty easy to ignore the former in this case and enjoy the latter on its own terms, but I can absolutely imagine having a different reaction. Particularly because a great deal of my affection for this traces back to the source material.</p><p>Not the animated movie - honestly, Peter Pan ranks pretty close to my least favorite of the Disney classics. And not the 1904 play, either: according to the credits, this was instead inspired by Peter and Wendy, J.M. Barrie's 1911 novelization of that play. And I've got some strong feelings about that book, in no small part because it was hugely influential on me while writing <a href="https://www.erinlsnyder.com/p/other-books.html#ForLoveofChildren">my first novel</a>.</p><p>While there are no shortage of live-action adaptations that play with dark ideas, most frame Peter heroically and use either the antagonists or setting to push things darker. But that's not at all how the book works (or the original play, if memory serves, though good luck finding a staging that doesn't water it down for young audiences). While we're of course encouraged to root for the boy who never grows up, he's ultimately as much a monster as Hook, if not more so. To a degree, all the kids are, which is ultimately the point. Children can be exceedingly cruel, so the primal manifestation of childhood would be unimaginably so.</p><p>The brilliance of the novel is how differently it will be interpreted by kids and adults. To a young audience, the adventure shines through, while the darkness plays as comedy. But as a grown-up you'll relate to the Darling parents and - to a limited degree - even with Hook.</p><p>David Lowery's adaptation doesn't go this far, of course. Barrie was willing to pen an epilogue in which Peter effectively abandons Wendy as she ages and has forgotten the long dead Tinker Bell, but no one is going to make a big-budget kid's movie with that kind of ending, least of all Disney. Instead, Lowery draws inspiration from this version of Pan, as well as a few lines making Hook into more than a generic villain. James Hook is a pitiful, aging man, alone and desperate for emotional connection.</p><p>From that, Lowery builds a new story seemingly aware of its state as one of an endless number of adaptations. The fourth wall isn't broken, but it's certainly prodded on more than one occasion, such as when the audience is all but dared to object to the (wise) decision to include girls among the lost boys' ranks. Likewise, the story consistently tries to invert sexist and racist elements within Barrie's work. I'm not at all qualified to state whether these attempts are sufficient, but I can say from a story and thematic standpoint, I found them satisfying. </p><p>But the real payoff here is within the character relationships. I don't love the choice to revamp Hook's origin here, but I found the payoffs effective, and I do love the way this plays into some of the aforementioned aspects of Pan's character from the book. This isn't that Pan, and his arc certainly isn't the same, but I think the ideas are rooted in the source material enough to make for a compelling direction for an adaptation.</p><p>Again, this is far from a perfect film. The effects are hit-or-miss (though the pirate ship sequence at the end looked great), the color palette is far too dark, and we really didn't need that last shot (God forbid one of these ends on even a hint of tragedy, I suppose). But despite the flaws, this one really worked for me. The characters had depth, the story recontextualized the origin in fascinating ways, and the performances were all fantastic. The casting on the kids was particularly good.</p><p>For the record, that's enough to cement this as my favorite movie adaptation of Peter Pan. Honestly, that's not the highest bar to clear - again, I don't think much of the Disney classic, and I really haven't liked the other two big-budget live-action attempts - but I really did enjoy this. Just know your mileage may vary.</p><div><br /></div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-51564980106989681672023-04-22T14:11:00.000-07:002023-04-22T14:11:26.867-07:00Finale Frontier Extravaganza!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip_0-JNB4BdmZaqrROxcjoXXxuOGNF5x3VmuU8_LqOe55L2kBnSAbYDNxAg4roj0t3YyxTMA31tk-10nwwgXaWeIJUMYA5XulFZM-fp46jQ7c314D-yqaWG3xVk-8oKWsBxrt94FPMHDz-Mgjt0eNnBd811HFdg_FaGM9IBT8J9e4sldeebYZlJFGmsw/s4080/PXL_20230422_024253796.PORTRAIT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2070" data-original-width="4080" height="162" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip_0-JNB4BdmZaqrROxcjoXXxuOGNF5x3VmuU8_LqOe55L2kBnSAbYDNxAg4roj0t3YyxTMA31tk-10nwwgXaWeIJUMYA5XulFZM-fp46jQ7c314D-yqaWG3xVk-8oKWsBxrt94FPMHDz-Mgjt0eNnBd811HFdg_FaGM9IBT8J9e4sldeebYZlJFGmsw/s320/PXL_20230422_024253796.PORTRAIT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>This week brought us three season finales for three separate space-related series in genre franchises comprising the past, present, and future. I don't generally chime in for TV these days, mainly because the bulk of television I consume isn't new, or at least not "new enough" to warrant a review. But, as you may have guessed, this is an exception to that rule: all three of these are shows I was following, and all strike me as worthy of reflection for different reasons.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>The Mandalorian: Season 3</b></p><p>My relationship with this show has grown a tad complicated over the past few years. Back in season one, it felt like a breath of fresh air. The production values were light-years ahead of its contemporaries, and the episodic format delivered weekly was a nice change of pace from the Netflix model which had become almost ubiquitous in streaming.</p><p>But by the second season, it felt like something had shifted. The focus moved from self-contained weekly stories to a larger narrative. To be fair, episodes in the first season had always been connected, and most of the individual chapters in season 2 continued to function as relatively complete stories, but the emphasis was now on a bigger picture. On its own, this isn't inherently bad, provided the larger arc is written well. But of course that was the rub: the writing in The Mandalorian was never the show's strong suit, so the whole thing became frustrating.</p><p>That issue carried through The Book of Boba Fett, which... we all understand that was the <i>actual</i> third season of The Mandalorian in all but name, right? Hell, I'm convinced it was supposed to be season three in name as well, at one point, with the implication being that the titular Mandalorian wasn't any specific character, but rather an ideal. They actually came out and announced this pertaining to Bo Katan's growing significance in season 3, but if it ever seemed weird they put their most popular show on hold for a year to make another show with a guy dressed basically the same way, then had their main characters from the previous show appear in the third act to resolve a lingering cliffhanger... yeah. Change "Book of Boba Fett" to a subtitle on season 2.5 of The Mandalorian, and it all makes a lot more sense, doesn't it?</p><p>Regardless, the issue persisted - and in my opinion escalated - in The Mandalorian season 3. The storyline felt like it was running in place, to the point the last two episodes could essentially be moved right after Fett, with only minor corrections to fix a few obstacles introduced at the end of season 2. The plot of season 3 largely felt contrived to pad out the episode count and set up future spin-offs. Meanwhile, as the amount of screen time given to characters compulsively wearing helmets increased, issues around the lack of facial expression did as well. I was mostly okay with the main character's face being hidden for almost the entire series, but there were episodes this season where that was the case with almost everyone. I know it was an artistic choice, but - in my opinion, at least - it was a bad one in a live-action visual medium. Sequences that should have been harrowing or tense felt silly.</p><p>However... there's a twist: this isn't a negative review. For all my issues with the season, several things redeemed the experience. First, the visual elements of the show continue to impress me. Every episode includes breathtaking sequences and creatures. At the risk of showing my age, when I was young I'd go see genre <i>movies</i> that couldn't match what this show delivers weekly in terms of design and execution. And, if I'm being honest, most of those movies weren't any better written. It's astonishing to me shows with these kinds of production values exist and are seldom discussed in this context.</p><div>In addition, the sixth episode (that's the one with Jack Black, Lizzo, and Christopher Lloyd) felt like a return to the episodic fun the show had been lacking. It was a huge improvement over the trajectory of the season and a reminder that Star Wars is at its best when it's weird, unexpected, and unconstrained by genre conventions.</div><p>In fact, my least favorite episode, the one spent chasing down a side story on Coruscant, deserves props for experimenting. I wish the outcome had been more interesting, but I do appreciate they tried. For all my problems with this installment, I kind of wish more episodes had operated under a similar philosophy (just preferably with characters we actually care about).</p><p>But all of that's appetizer, because the real reason I'm finishing season three with a positive impression comes down to that finale. Because... uh... it was awesome?</p><p>I don't have a lot of additional depth to add to that. It's not that the script brought everything full circle or anything. It's just the pacing of what amounted to an extended battle sequence delivered something energetic and immensely satisfying. It was a big, action-packed conclusion with some really sweet moments between Din Djarin and Grogu. I loved it.</p><p>I have no idea what the future holds for these characters. I'm hoping the show gets more room to play without having to worry about connecting dots and setting up spin-offs, but the truth is I'd stick around for the visuals and vibes alone. For better or worse, this franchise grabbed hold of me when I was five and never really let go. I'd love to see the writing improve closer to what we got in Andor and Kenobi, but even if it doesn't, I'll keep watching.</p><p>After all, even the frustrating stuff is still fun.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur, Season 1</b></p><p>What concerns me about this show is that, due to its release strategy, subject matter, and young target demographic, it seems like the bulk of the population may not be aware that it's a goddamn masterpiece.</p><p>That's not hyperbole - this show is funny, emotional, and artistic, with catchy musical numbers and fantastic characters. It draws from the best animated works for inspiration - it's not hard to catch ideas and design elements reminiscent of Spider-Verse, Powerpuff Girls, and a host of other works - but they're all combined and remixed in ways that feel fresh and new. The series isn't afraid to alter its tone from episode to episode, either, with some feeling silly and light and others packing a punch.</p><p>On top of all that, this fits in some surprising guest stars from the MCU, to the point I find myself wondering (hoping, really) if it's secretly officially part of that world. How great would it be if Moon Girl and friends showed up in Secret War or something?</p><p>Regardless, this is a really exciting show combining music, animation, and great writing into something genuinely fantastic. It's one of the best new animated shows I've seen in ages and is absolutely worth checking out.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Star Trek: Picard: Season 3</b></p><p>I'm going to cut to the chase - this season of Picard is the best Star Trek I've seen since at least the original series, and that includes movies. This isn't merely good; it's phenomenally good. Inexplicably good. Weirdly good.</p><p>Weirdly, in part, because the first two seasons were nowhere near this level of quality. I say that as someone who enjoyed the first season of Picard quite a bit, too. Hell, I even mostly liked the second, despite it being a bit of a fiasco. But this is on a whole other level.</p><p>To put this in a little more context, I'm not actually a huge fan of The Next Generation. I've got some nostalgia for the characters, but when I rewatched the series about a decade ago, I thought it was fairly mediocre overall, with maybe a half-dozen great episodes spread out over the series. This wasn't going to be an automatic slam dunk with me.</p><p>But God, did this deliver. The show is broken into three arcs: two four-episodes long, then a 2-part finale. The first of these is the strongest, delivering what amounts to a movie-length adventure that incorporates the best aspects of the first two original series Trek movies. It lampshades its references, too - at times it feels like it's remaking those films with Next Gen characters, an idea that probably shouldn't work, and yet....</p><p>There are a couple reasons they get away with it. First, this looks and feels fantastic. Particularly the first four episodes are, start to finish, movie quality. Everything looks polished and planned out, the editing is on point, and the music choices are constantly inspired. The pace and tone deliver tension and suspense you rarely get from TV.</p><p>But all that can only take you so far. You also need writing, and that might be the season's strongest asset. I might quibble with some structural choices in the story, but the dialogue is pitch perfect. Every line feels like it's being written by people who spent decades obsessing over these characters. This isn't simply rehashing old relationships and character beats, either - we're exploring new facets of the bridge crew that emerged later in life. We're seeing aspects that have changed and curtains that have peeled away. And it's cathartic, funny, and touching. Early on, the show introduces a beat that any other series would have treated as a generic twist with a run-of-the-mill reveal. But instead, we're not treated like we're stupid, and neither are the characters. Rather than building to a cliché conversation, the key moment is handled with a silent exchange of expressions. And in no small part because these actors are fantastic, we're treated to something truly special. The twist is it's not a twist, but instead a touching moment of humanity and growth.</p><p>The second arc can't quite maintain the force of the first, but it's still fantastic. It's still tense, exciting, and funny, but you start occasionally remembering you're watching TV rather than a movie. The last two episodes swap out the new villain introduced for the season in favor of a returning nemesis, which is both a bit of a letdown and a testament to just how good this season is. When the return of a fan-favorite villain is less interesting than a new one... that's pretty high praise for the writing, acting, and directing that went into that new villain right?</p><p>But, yes, the last few episodes feel like the end of most big budget movie trilogies: technically well executed with great character moments, but a little light on emotional depth. Again, still good - <b>very good</b>, in fact - but best moments in the season aren't found there.</p><p>I also feel like I should mention the last couple episodes hinge on a potentially unfortunate plot device that could - and I suspect will - be read as an endorsement of right-wing politics. I don't think that was the intention, but it's far too easy to see the story as a sort of literal "woke" mind virus controlling the youth. While I think this was just an unintended side-effect of trying to write around the realities of the characters' ages and the story, it works way too well as a metaphor working against everything Star Trek stands for.</p><p>But I can't fault them too much for this misstep. The season, in its entirety, is the sort of achievement that raises the bar for the franchise and its competitors. It delivers everything fans of the characters could dream of, along with production values beyond anything I'd expected. This is absolutely fantastic stuff.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-61898906869013345382023-03-11T19:30:00.000-08:002023-03-11T19:30:59.088-08:00Catch-Up, Part 12: The Oscary Edition<p>I did <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/03/catch-up-part-8-best-picture-edition.html">something like this last year</a>, so I figured I'd gather together my thoughts on as many of the big awards movies I'd seen but hadn't already reviewed elsewhere. This year, that's going to mean movies nominated for either Best Picture or Best Animated Picture. I've now seen all five of the animation nominees, along with seven of the ten Best Picture contenders. I'm also throwing in a couple reviews for last year's Best Picture Nominees I missed at the time. </p><p>To avoid repeating myself, I'm not going to rehash my thoughts on movies I've already reviewed or written up. For the most part, this year that means movies I talked about in my <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/12/2022-retrospective.html">end-of-year retrospective</a>, where I discussed Everything Everywhere All at Once, The Banshees of Inisherin, Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio, and Turning Red (I also reviewed <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/03/movie-review-turning-red.html">Turning Red</a> on its own back when it came out). I also just posted some thoughts about <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2023/03/elvis-2022.html">Elvis over at Mainlining Christmas</a>, so you can read about that there.</p><p>I'm going to refrain from ranking, but my current picks are Turning Red for Animated and Everything Everywhere All at Once for Best Picture. That said, I consider both categories extremely competitive this year. The animated, in particular, is incredibly close, with Marcel the Shell With Shoes On so close, I'm still second guessing myself. I didn't like Pinocchio quite as much as some people, but I can absolutely see <i>why</i> they like it. Frankly, all three deserve to win.</p><p>On the Best Picture front, I'm definitely in the Everything Everywhere All At Once camp, though to be honest it's less because I think it's the best of the nominees than I think it winning would be the most interesting outcome and would age the best. I have a hard time seriously comparing it against Women Talking, All Quiet on the Western Front, and The Banshees of Inisherin in terms of quality: they're all amazing films in very different styles. Any would be deserving of the prize, frankly. The others I've seen feel are close behind. I might roll my eyes a bit if the prize unexpectedly goes to Elvis or Top Gun Maverick, but I certainly won't be angry.</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>LAST YEAR'S NOMINEES</b></span></p><p><b>Belfast (2021)</b></p><p>My thoughts on this movie are going to be a little sparse, because frankly I think the basics are pretty obvious. It's good. It's very good. It does interesting things with shot composition, use of black & white (and even occasional color), and perspective. It's a good movie that delves into difficult subject matter in a novel way.</p><p>I enjoyed it.</p><p>Do I think it was robbed of the Academy Award? Well, I actually haven't seen Coda yet (it's the only one of the bunch I haven't gotten to, mostly because it's tucked behind an inconvenient paywall), so I can't say for certain. I didn't really think this was appreciably better than the other nominees I watched (excluding Don't Look Up, but being better than that is a low bar to clear), but it wasn't necessarily worse, either. This would have been a fine pick, but then so would have Dune, King Richard, The Power of the Dog, Drive My Car, and (my favorite so far) West Side Story. All really good movies; none so much better than the rest to make a different outcome egregious in my mind. Nightmare Alley strikes me as maybe a hair below (still really good, just not quite on par with the others), and Don't Look Up isn't in the same league as any of them.</p><p>I wish I had something worthwhile to say about Belfast, but part of being late to a party like this is knowing when it's best to sit quietly in the corner. I like how the movies and plays the characters watch feel more real than the world they inhabit. I'm almost tempted to argue the holiday segment qualifies this as a Christmas film and write it up for Mainlining Christmas, but I don't actually believe that. It's a cool movie, but I haven't got much to say beyond that.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Licorice Pizza (2022) </b></p><p>While I enjoyed Licorice Pizza, the truth is I found myself a little lost, and some assumptions I made about the film turned out to be incorrect. I certainly hadn't realized the lead was based on a real person, for example, and that alone makes me reconsider the overall premise. Within that context, the somewhat disjointed structure takes on the feeling of a series of secondhand stories being reassembled into a rough narrative. You're left with something closer to a fairytale than a memory, which is likely the point. The movie's about a time, place, and life that seems fantastical.</p><p>Because it's Paul Thomas Anderson, it's all very beautiful and evocative, full of extended takes and gorgeous color. Which is good, because the content, perhaps by design, is less engaging than what we're seeing. I don't want to dismiss this as style over substance, because there's real substance to the style. But for better or worse I wasn't particularly invested in the main characters or their relationship, and I found the humor more charming than funny. Whether any of that's an issue comes down to what you want out of the experience: again, this pulls you into a fascinating world I can best describe as the filmmaker's interpretation of anecdotes told to him by an aging movie producer. While it's technically a romantic comedy, it actively works against ever feeling like one in ways I don't think I've ever seen before. On that level, it's a fascinating experiment.</p><p>Is a great film? Maybe. I found it interesting enough to agree the nomination it picked up was deserved, but I'd probably be raising an eyebrow if it had actually won. I haven't seen as many of Anderson's films as I'd like, but I don't think this is at the level of There Will Be Blood or Phantom Thread, though it wouldn't surprise me if viewers with a different perspective on the '70s disagreed. </p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>BEST ANIMATED</b></span></p><p><b>Marcel the Shell With Shoes On (2022)</b></p><p>This is one of those times I find myself watching a movie I've heard a thousand people insist is delightful then, as the end credits roll, find myself with the piping hot take of, "that was delightful." So, yeah, if you've heard anyone talk about the fantastically charming "Marcel the Shell With Shoes On" before, you can probably skip my write up, because I'm not challenging the consensus here. It's actually that good. </p><p>I'll offer a few observations that surprised me. First, for some reason I thought this was going to be a road trip movie, which it absolutely wasn't. I think I'm used to movies with similar starting points turning into archetypal Odysseys, so I assumed this would follow suit. Instead, it's a much more intimate exploration of emotion and existentialism. Not at all what you'd expect from a family-friendly expansion of a web series from more than a decade ago, but damned if it doesn't work.</p><p>A big part of why it works is the movie's faith in the inherent comedy of talking shells with feet (or at least shoes) openly discussing their fears and hopes. You could actually do a version of this story with all human characters (assuming you replaced the scale and shell specific jokes), but the dialogue would be cloyingly melodramatic. But because they're shells, the movie's able to leverage the audience's already suspended disbelief to explore very big ideas openly and honestly. You're left with the sensation you're seeing something profound. It's a moving and beautiful demonstration of how powerful a silly idea can be in the right hands.</p><p>The cinematography here is likewise fantastic. The movie treats its primary location - a small, rundown house - as if it's a vast environment. The use of light and focus give the setting depth and complexity despite its size.</p><p>I'm not sure whether I'm rooting for this or Turning Red right now, but it's a hell of a movie. I should also note it's been a good year for Jenny Slate, who co-created, co-wrote, and voices the title character. And on top of all that, she also plays the dog lady in Everything Everywhere All At Once, so either she's doing a hell of a job picking A24 projects or they should start casting her in every movie they make.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>The Sea Beast (2022)</b></p><p>This had been on my radar for a while, but kind of fell off after failing to make much of an impact (that's right - impact, not splash: I don't invoke puns lightly). The Oscar nomination bumped it up on the queue, so I gave it a watch. I enjoyed it - particularly the first half - immensely, though I was ultimately left thinking it was better an experience than a movie. And, somewhat awkwardly, it's The Sea Beast's strongest aspects that prevent it from fully working as a film.</p><p>To be clear, there was never a point in which I didn't expect this to pivot from "dark fantasy adventure" to "How to Train Your Dragon with sea serpents." Even if it hadn't been clear from the trailer, it was obvious from the start there was a twist coming. And, from an ethical point of view, it did need to be there. You can't make a kids movie where the moral is, "Hate and destroy things that are different, and believe authority without question." When I say I wanted the whole movie to continue with the tone and narrative of the first half, I'm speaking in terms of my emotional reaction and engagement, rather than any kind of serious critique.</p><p>That said, there's a reason I felt that way, and it brings us to the catch-22 that is The Sea Beast: they made the first half <i>too good</i>. And, so we're clear, I think that's actually a problem with the movie, at least from a structural point-of-view.</p><p>Here's the thing: the stuff about privateers on a fantasy world enlisted to hunt massive sea monsters is handled amazingly well. It draws you into their world and mindset, selling you on the nobility of their profession and romance of their lives. And, on one level, it's supposed to! It's supposed to set up the twist where we learn (surprise, surprise) that the "monsters" aren't evil; they're mostly just defending themselves. It's a good idea on paper, but - again - they did too good a job. So when the inevitable turn comes, you just want to go back to the visceral, grounded adventure that's been taken away.</p><p>And, to be frank, the mostly by-the-numbers misunderstood monsters story isn't managed well enough to make up the difference. On top of that, because this is as long as it is, it feels less like a second half and more like the film resets halfway through.</p><p>To be fair, there's some good stuff in that second half, including funny sequences, some cool action sequences (including what can only be described as an animated kaiju battle), and an ending with more thematic teeth than I expected (though I worry some of it could be misread as anti-science, rather than anti-hate and anti-capitalism).</p><p>But the second half just isn't anywhere near as good as the first, which almost makes you feel like you're on the ship (the visuals are great, but don't overlook the role sound has in creating that illusion). The closest comparison I can think of is Wall-E, which elicited a similar response from viewers, but I think there's a crucial difference. The disconnect between Wall-E's two halves didn't undermine the thematic core of the movie and prevent the story from fully connecting; here, I think it does. The movie as a whole would have been stronger if the first half hadn't been as well executed.</p><p>That said, I'm glad it was, because I just loved every second spent on that ship. They sacrificed the whole for the parts, but the first half was <i>so good</i>, I found it worth it for the experience.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Puss in Boots: The Last Wish (2022)</b></p><p>It's a catch-22 - I'd never have bothered seeing a Puss in Boots sequel if I hadn't heard it was amazing, but by the time I watched it, it was never really going to live up to the hype. To be fair, it comes close: The Last Wish does a phenomenal job building compelling emotional journeys for its main characters. And there are more main characters than you'd expect - there's a case to be made this movie belongs as much to a new character (at least I think she's new) who steals the show, just as the titular one did in Shrek 2, the last installment in the Shrek-verse I actually watched.</p><p>Which for those of you uncertain when these films came out, means I've never seen the first Puss in Boots movie. That <i>may</i> have been a mistake. Regardless how good or bad it might be, it would have been useful having some background on Kitty Softpaws. I don't feel like it's essential, but it would have been nice to know upfront whether she was a returning character or just being retroactively added into the backstory. It's a situation where I understood and appreciated the arc, but suspect it would be stronger if there's a sense of resonance around her presence.</p><p>The plot in The Last Wish meanders a bit and would probably have benefited from a bit of streamlining in the first act (was the cat lady sequence really the best way they could think of to introduce a few characters and conveying Puss's despair?), but on a whole it's nice to see one of these concerned more with an inner journey than saving the world (though technically I suppose there's a bit of that, as well).</p><p>Moving on to the animation, we're clearly in the post-Spider-Verse era of the medium. This borrows stylistic elements from that and Mitchells vs. the Machines, though it doesn't use them as effectively. This is using framerate mismatches, 2D shading, hand drawn flourishes, and stylized backgrounds, but it's not as clear what they're going for. I guess it looks like kids books I've seen from the early 2000s - maybe that's the reference? It looks good, but I'm not sure it's actually a better choice for this story than just updating the look of earlier installments.</p><p>Ultimately, I don't think this is on par with the top three animated movies of last year. Still, this is a well-written, well-directed exploration of character, which is a hell of a thing to be writing about the sixth theatrical movie in the Shrek franchise. It's absolutely worth seeing, and it may very well play even better to those with more of an investment in this property.</p><div><br /></div><div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>BEST PICTURE NOMINEES</b></span></p></div><p><b>All Quiet on the Western Front (2022)</b></p><p>I assumed from its Best Picture nomination that this adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front would be good, but I wasn't expecting it to be quite this beautiful. I generally expect war movies (or at least antiwar movies) to be intentionally ugly. But the vast majority of the movie was instead hauntingly gorgeous. We're treated to long shots of wintery landscapes, and mountains with mist rolling off. Even the battlefields look colorful and almost magic at times.</p><p>You'd think that would undermine the message; instead it highlights the absurdity of war and the senselessness of slaughter in the face of such beauty. The war is an utterly pointless one, and the movie lays the blame at the feet of those who command it be waged in the name of honor. But the movie demonstrates again and again that real honor lies only in compassion, even when compassion is impotent to stem the loss of life.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Top Gun: Maverick (2022)</b></p><p>My thoughts on Maverick are admittedly a bit simplistic. I think I've seen the original once, and that was more than twenty years ago. I recall thinking it was fine, but it didn't leave a lasting impression on me the way it did for some of my generation.</p><p>My feelings for the follow-up are somewhat similar: I thought this was pretty good, as far as legacy sequels go, but I wasn't floored by the experience. That said, it's worth acknowledging my experience with Maverick wasn't what the filmmakers intended - I watched this on a television, not a movie screen. And given how much of the movie's appeal is based on the fact the actual actors are filmed in actual fighter jets (with Cruise even flying his), this is obviously going to feel very different on the small screen.</p><p>That said, I don't think this would have completely wowed me even if I'd gone to the theater. That's not an indictment of the film, mind you: it's more a "me" thing. I don't have a great deal of context for what real footage taken from inside a fighter jet looks like, so - honestly - it's kind of academic. I know intellectually this was the real deal, but it doesn't actually strike me as more "realistic" than, say, some of the better Star Wars dogfights from the sequel trilogy.</p><p>Incidentally, I've had similar reactions to some of the stunts in the recent Mission Impossible movies - I think it's cool that Cruise was strapped to an airplane, but I don't think it made my experience better than if they'd used visual effects. I love the Mission Impossible movies because of tone, pacing, plotting, and genre, not the choice to use practical over visual effects. Hell, I think the HALO jump in Fallout looked kind of cheesy (still a great movie, though).</p><p>I realize this isn't a common reaction among action fans, and I truly don't mean to dismiss the incredible accomplishment of pulling some of these stunts off. I understand and respect why Maverick tops so many best-of lists from last year. And, again, I still liked it quite a bit. Just not as much as fans who waited decades or are in awe they managed to film so much of the flying for real.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Tár (2022)</b></p><p>Fair or not, the movie Tár most reminds me of is Joker. Both are impressively shot character studies of anti-heroes centered on phenomenal lead performances, both were nominated for Best Picture, and the narratives in both jump around a lot. Hell, they're even both focused on music.</p><p>For the record, I think Tár is the better of the two, though I have a similar issue with the film. My biggest problem with Joker was that it approached an important issue and failed to really say anything. While I certainly don't believe every movie needs to offer a thesis or political stance, I do think there are subjects that really require more than asking questions if you're centering a movie around them. I thought Joker's decision to invoke the health crisis around mental illness then sort of abandon the idea was in questionable taste. I think the same is true of Tár's choice to tell a story where a lesbian abuses her power to take advantage of impressionable young women.</p><p>I spent most of the film thinking it was going somewhere. There's a through line implying Tár emulates the old, straight men who dominated her field historically, to the point she sees herself as one of them: I expected the movie to follow through on this idea and perhaps explore the idea that patriarchal systems will produce patriarchal oppressors, even if the person being transformed is a woman. Or perhaps ask whether it's possible for anyone other than an abuser to ascend into power in a system built around abusers. There are fascinating ideas posed by the movie, but they're largely abandoned in the last act. Some viewers may be satisfied with the decision to pose the question: I'd have liked the film to take a stance.</p><p>The movie's still very good, mind you. Blanchett's fantastic, the cinematography is gorgeous, and the sound design is evocative. In the interest of full disclosure, I will note that, had this <i>not</i> already been nominated for Best Picture, I'd most likely have a more favorable view of it. Hell, if it had been overlooked entirely, I might be fawning over how good this looked and sounded, and of course how amazing Blanchett is in the role. So take my lukewarm endorsement with a grain of salt: I think this one falls short of what I want from Best Picture winners, but it's still a pretty great film.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Women Talking (2022)</b></p><p>I'm almost more impressed that Women Talking winds up feeling like a movie at all than the fact it's a fantastic one. The script is really closer to a philosophical dialogue than a narrative story, at least for the first two-thirds. It is, quite literally, about a group of women debating ethical, religious, and philosophical issues to determine the best course for them to take in response to a lifetime of trauma and injustice. The inciting incident is over by the time the movie starts, and - while there are individual character arcs - it's less about the individuals than the collective.</p><p>Before going on I want to clarify that looking at this as a philosophical dialogue, I'm of the opinion is very good one. Characters represent various evolving viewpoints, they begin with only simple foundational principles, then use reason to construct a compelling philosophical system bringing them to an inevitable conclusion. Frankly, the script would be good addition to college classrooms teaching classical philosophical texts (at least in states where it's still legal to teach such things). This is a great script, but I'm not sure it was a script to a <i>movie</i>.</p><p>But it turns out Sarah Polley's as good a director as a philosopher, because she manages to make this feel like a film. She's not alone in deserving praise here - the cinematography, editing, and performances all go a long way to giving a movie where nothing really happens the gravitas of an epic - but she brings this together in a way that's stunning to behold. Women Talking is gorgeous to watch, emotionally engaging, and viscerally powerful: pulling that out of an extended philosophical debate is one hell of a magic trick. Frankly, it's a crime Polley wasn't nominated for Best Director.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-68722322327639680432023-02-26T09:25:00.000-08:002023-02-26T09:25:55.867-08:00Catch-Up, Part 11: Sequels, Prequels, Reboots, and Spin-Offs<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilCpK2iySQ82FJlVmsQeVLVECMgxQrXgu-XvKFrbJyQillpGpmZ5iwf6HAaTFrG3wK9OL3wM-MswAI2Dq8cerBmh3tBIpDe53LHVI992ruufi0Q8SzyQRDREU8P02VNFWZph0-AfjhGg3n0Eob2kzczb2cLFI1BqjZLm4Mr0nkKvNwr3KCCVlKiKswDA/s4080/PXL_20230226_171835465.PORTRAIT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3072" data-original-width="4080" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilCpK2iySQ82FJlVmsQeVLVECMgxQrXgu-XvKFrbJyQillpGpmZ5iwf6HAaTFrG3wK9OL3wM-MswAI2Dq8cerBmh3tBIpDe53LHVI992ruufi0Q8SzyQRDREU8P02VNFWZph0-AfjhGg3n0Eob2kzczb2cLFI1BqjZLm4Mr0nkKvNwr3KCCVlKiKswDA/s320/PXL_20230226_171835465.PORTRAIT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>For those just joining us, this series is where I catch up on all the movies I'm not reviewing as they're released for various reasons. Everything here is mostly recent, but not so recent I could justify an actual review.</p><p>Today's theme is franchises. All the movies I'm looking at are part of established franchises. The vast majority are superheroes, but I'm also including a number of other genre films that fit the broader definition.</p><p>Before I get to those, I actually want to back up and talk a little about a movie I reviewed a while ago that would have qualified under this topic. I recently rewatched <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/07/movie-review-black-widow.html">Black Widow</a> and discovered I liked it significantly more than on my initial viewing. I more or less stand by my critiques, but not so much the weight given to them or their effect on the whole. On rewatch, I found the themes worked better and the story was more impactful. I still wouldn't list this among my favorite MCU movies, but I expect I'd rank it in the top half - maybe even top third. It's not uncommon for me to respond to movies differently after seeing them a few times, but it's rare for my opinion to shift this much (and even rarer in this direction). And who knows: maybe I'll watch it again a year from now and find it's climbed even higher.</p><p>Now then. Let's get to the new reviews.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Snake Eyes: GI Joe Origins (2021)</b></p><p>First, I need to partially retract something I've said a few times in the past. While discussing recent Fast and Furious movies, I've repeated variations of the idea that franchise was a better approximation of GI Joe cartoons than the actual GI Joe franchise could ever hope be in live-action. While I still think F&F offers a delightfully updated spin on one aspect of GI Joe, it certainly doesn't reflect the whole experience.</p><p>Neither does Snake Eyes, to be honest, but that's at least partly by design. This isn't a particularly tech heavy story, and as such we're not treated to all the silly toy vehicles that form a major component of Joe. But you know what this does have? Magic rocks and mystical snakes. That's right: this has the ridiculous fantasy aspect covered.</p><p>Also, we get ninja with inexplicably superhuman abilities, including the titular character. Where did he get these abilities? We never find out, nor should we care. This is a movie about cartoonish characters with cartoonish abilities doing cartoonish things. It's a dumb, campy, cheesy adventure... and it is <i>so</i> <i>damn refreshing</i>.</p><p>I hate that this bombed at the box office. I blame the marketing, which made it look mostly grounded. I suppose critics deserve a little more credit, as this is the highest rated film in the series on Rotten Tomatoes: it's at 35%.</p><p>I'm guessing they'll reboot again rather than continue this iteration of the franchise, which is a shame. This feels like the start to a version of GI Joe that would eventually get to Serpentor and do the character justice. It's pure, unapologetic Saturday morning fun that's willing to be stupid in order to be entertaining. Precisely 0% of this movie is boring, and I can't think of a better compliment to anything in this franchise.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022)</b></p><p>It's kind of fascinating seeing a Ryan Coogler movie that has fundamental structural flaws, in part because it has the counterintuitive effect of highlighting just how good a director he is. Wakanda Forever is the first film from Coogler that doesn't feel like an instant classic. There are characters and subplots that should have been cut, sequences that are out of place, and moments that feel contrived. And yet, the stuff that does work - character moments, emotional beats, and beautifully framed sequences - still feels like it's been crafted by a master. Usually when comic book movies don't work, everything feels slapdash: here, you can see the care and love poured into the story. And, frankly, the majority of the movie's pretty great.</p><p>Having Shuri's arc mirror that of her brother in Civil War was clever, and I love the scenes between her and her mother, as well as her interactions with Namor. And speaking of Namor, the MCU's first actual anti-hero is incredible here. I'm not sure any other comics character has pulled off this radical of a reimagining while still capturing everything significant about the source material. This is simultaneously completely new and a perfect adaptation of one of Marvel's first characters: that's a hell of an accomplishment.</p><p>I'm not sure how the scene in the Ancestral Plane didn't get spoiled for me, but I'm thrilled it wasn't: that was incredible, both from a conceptual standpoint and as an experience. It was exciting and unnerving at once: I absolutely loved it.</p><p>But for all its merits, the movie is definitely a case of the whole being less than the sum of its parts, mostly because some of those parts don't work with the larger narrative. Specifically, the three American characters - Riri Williams, Everett Ross, and Valentina - feel like distractions rather than additions. For what it's worth, I love all these characters, but they just didn't fit in this movie. Ironheart, in particular, feels like she's been wedged in: her motives keep changing from scene to scene and never really make sense in context. My guess is she's here to set up her Disney+ series (which, to be fair, I am excited about). But the subplot to chase her down just draws attention away from Shuri, Queen Ramonda, and Namor, who are really the core of the movie. And they were already competing for screen time with Okoye and Nakia.</p><p>Sorry, quick side note. I think this movie has issues, but it's cool as hell to see a superhero team-up where all the principal protagonists are women of color. </p><p>Now back to those issues. I think Okoye and Nakia's stories would have worked better if they'd removed the subplot in America. Both characters are still fun as it is, but this never quite comes together the way the first one did. The first Black Panther managed to juggle a huge number of characters and plot threads, but because everything came back to the central theme and plot, Coogler made it work. That wasn't really the case here: Ironheart, Nakia, Okoye, and Ross all have their own mini-arcs, but connections to the central story feel forced. Pulling out the American characters wouldn't entirely have fixed this, but it would have made it much less noticeable.</p><p>There were also a handful of times compositing fell short of the otherwise beautiful effects, though this is both an ongoing issue with Marvel and with movies completed during the pandemic in general. It's not a huge issue, but considering how much of Wakanda Forever was jaw-dropping, the occasional sequence where an actor was superimposed into a scene where they clearly weren't present became annoyingly obvious.</p><p>Overall, this one was mixed, though the good stuff in the mix was better than we generally get from genre movies that aren't obvious homeruns. I wish there'd been less focus on setting up future installments (assuming that's what happened here), but overall the good definitely outweighed the bad. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>No Time to Die (2021)</b></p><p>I grew up watching the Bond movies with my father (we were particularly fond of the Connery era). I wouldn't say it was ever my favorite franchise, but this series will always have a place in my heart. My wife is a fan of the books - I've read a handful myself. We also own every movie in the franchise, with the exception of Spectre (which, despite what I write below, I intend to rectify).</p><p>I love Casino Royale and even had a generally positive reaction to Quantum of Solace (though I last saw it in the theater). I like Skyfall despite some major reservations about the script. As for Spectre, I consider it one of the five worst films in the franchise (the others being Diamonds Are Forever, Live and Let Die, Moonraker, and Octopussy). Spectre took the series' most interesting antagonist and reimagined him in the least interesting way possible. Everything about the movie was uninspired, and the film as a whole was astonishingly boring.</p><p>One thing I'll say about No Time to Die is I never found it boring. Frankly, there was always more than enough going to hold my attention and keep me emotionally engaged throughout. The problem is the emotion I had wasn't what they were going for. I spent the entirety of No Time to Die on the verge of bursting out laughing.</p><p>In theory, this was supposed to be a somber, serious film about legacy and sacrifice. It's a mirror image of On Her Majesty's Secret Service, a fact it broadcasts loudly and clearly in a myriad different ways. It wants to be powerful and have a lasting impact. And it is hilariously, comically, unbelievably clumsy in its attempt.</p><p>For the record, that's far preferable to boring. But it approaches Her Majesty's Secret Service the way Star Trek Into Darkness does Wrath of Khan, only Into Darkness managed basic elements of filmmaking, such as shot-to-shot continuity and character motivation. No Time to Die is just an incoherent mess that left me surprised there were <i>only</i> seven credited writers. </p><p>I'm not kidding when I say I had fun watching this. It didn't take long for me to realize what kind of movie I was seeing, and then I just sat back and enjoyed the ridiculous absurdity of the script, coupled with some legitimately great action sequences. It's between $250 and $300 million dollars spent to conclude a franchise (or at least this iteration of that franchise) in something best described as "so bad it's good."</p><p>But, hey, at least we didn't get another Spectre.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Hellboy (2019)</b></p><p>This benefits from comically low expectations, but overall... I didn't hate this. It's a long way from <i>good</i>, mind you. Structurally, it's a mess of sequences, characters, and ideas tossed together in a halfhearted attempt to touch on as many "greatest hits" from the comics as possible, regardless of whether any of them actually belonged in this story. It's more or less a by-the-numbers remake of the first del Toro film, minus the competency.</p><p>And yet there's still a lot of good stuff tossed in. The effects may be inconsistent, but when they're good (which usually equates to when they're practical), they're really quite ingenious. The short bits, considered out of context, hit as often as they miss.</p><p>If this had delivered a halfway decent ending, I think I'd actually defend it as a pretty solid entry in its genre. It... didn't do that, opting instead to mimic the 2004 ending with a few minor, dumb alterations, resulting in an almost comically inane conclusion. But, again, this isn't a "greater than the sum of its parts" kind of movie.</p><p>This isn't good, but as a throwback to the early 00's hastily thrown-together genre flicks, it's diverting enough to be better than it's 18% on Rotten Tomatoes would suggest. Not much better, mind you, but maybe a hair (or, if you're feeling generous, maybe even a horn).</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Glass (2019)</b></p><p>I know I'm in the minority here, but I loved this. Honestly, I think it's one of may favorite Shyamalan films, right up there with Signs. I like it more than Unbreakable and far more than Split.</p><p>It's not perfect, of course: Shyamalan movies never are. Some of the dialogue feels unnatural, and Anya Taylor-Joy's arc was in questionable taste. But the movie as a whole just worked for me. I loved the twist, despite suspecting it early on. As a fan of superhero movies, I found the three main characters fascinating. And the ending felt right for this series. I understand why some fans were upset, but I really enjoyed it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)</b></p><p>It's fine. Parts are better than fine: the mini-marshmallow men sequence was great. I also liked the gag with Sigourney at the end. And Phoebe's great - I liked her character a lot. I also thought this did a good job recreating the flavor of the original.</p><p>But, God, the pacing drags. There are extraneous plot lines and characters who only seem to be present so the Ghostbusters count can add up to four. The brother should have been cut entirely.</p><p>Overall, it's fun enough as a throwback, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed. This could have and definitely should have been better.</p><p>I find it astonishing anyone ranks this above the 2016 reboot, which took the franchise in new directions. I didn't hate this, but it's nowhere near the same league. It's closer to Ghostbusters 2, and even then falls a little short.</p><p><br /></p><div dir="auto"><b>The Craft Legacy (2020)</b></div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Something went terribly, terribly wrong here.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">At least that's my guess, because when I actually take a step back, the underlying framework to this seems like a solid starting point. You've got a plot that appears to be mirroring that of the original with a big twist at the end of the second act. You've got a protagonist secretly connected to said original in an interesting (albeit kind of played out) way. You've got a completely different source of conflict...</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">But not only does none of that add up to a satisfying film, the way it's presented undercuts the individual elements so completely, you have to deconstruct it to realize there was ever something good here at all.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Let's take another step back and talk about what this is. That's... kind of hard, actually, because "what it is" is watered down to the point it's barely anything. It's not horror. It's not comedy. It's not drama. I suppose it's technically fantasy, but just barely.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">If anything, I'd describe the experience as analogous to watching an overlong CW pilot. Compare that to the original, which...</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Okay, honestly, the original also kind of feels like a CW pilot, but it's got a bit of an edge to it. So, maybe a better CW pilot? Legacy just doesn't work as a movie. The finale is laughably cheap - I'm not exaggerating when I say it would have felt cheap for television <i>in the 90's</i>.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I'm astonished this was released in its current form. The Craft franchise isn't exactly the most valuable one out there, but it deserves better than this. Whether this got kneecapped by the studio (looking at you, <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2020/12/black-christmas-2019.html">Black Christmas</a>) or the director made some serious miscalculations, the end result is a movie that neither works as a satisfying continuation or as a standalone picture reimagined for a new generation.<br /></div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Simply put, this is a bad movie.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><p><b>Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021)</b></p><p>I think it's kind of good?</p><p>It's honestly difficult to gauge. The movie is leaning into the absurd contradictions of 1990's comics. For all the dark, brooding, violent appearance, most comics from that era were silly, campy things. They were childish stories pretending to be what kids thought "grown-up" stuff was.</p><p>Let There Be Carnage seems to understand this and embraces the flavor of the time. It's completely absurd, and intentionally stupid. And, largely because it's not putting on airs of anything else, it's a great deal of cartoonish fun.</p><p>In some ways, it feels like a good version of the comic book movies that came out in droves in the early 2000's: think Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Catwoman, or Green Lantern... only better. I'm not a big fan of that era (though I've always had a soft spot in my heart for the first Ghost Rider), but that's mainly because it grated on me that the source material was complicated and nuanced, while studios at the time seemed embarrassed to be adapting them.</p><p>Venom doesn't really have that issue. The concept was always silly - a more serious approach wouldn't suit it.</p><p>Let There Be Carnage is basically a comedy (and a romantic comedy, at that), and on that level it absolutely works. I almost wish they'd just skipped Carnage altogether and made this entirely about the relationship between Eddie and the symbiote. Not that Carnage doesn't have his moments, too.</p><p>You almost get the impression they set out to make the most fun bad movie they could, and mostly succeeded. Does that add up to a good film? Why get bogged down with semantics - the movie's enjoyable as an intentionally juvenile comedy adventure, and I recommend it on that level.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Eternals (2021)</b></p><p>Well, I guess I'm in the minority, because I kind of love this. Tonally, it's very different than where the bulk of MCU movies fall, but I have no issue with that. Frankly, the Marvel movies have gotten a bit monotone recently, at least for my tastes. It's nice to get something a bit more operatic.</p><p>This definitely felt more like what we've come to associate with DC than Marvel, though that's more a case of the movie franchises doubling down on certain styles and tones than anything inherent in the source material. Regardless, I've seen this described as more or less similar to a Zack Snyder film (I believe the director even cited Man of Steel as an influence). And I definitely see it: Chloe Zhao approaches superheroes in a similar way.</p><p>Only - and I say this as someone who will still defend Man of Steel - she's so much better at this than he is. For one thing, Zack Snyder gravitates towards edgy content, while Zhao goes for drama and emotion. If Eternals is a DC movie in disguise, it's DC circa 2010, while Zack Snyder's stuck in the 90's. Also, for my money the aesthetics in this are far better than what we got in <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/03/movie-review-justice-league-snyder-cut.html">The Snyder Cut</a> (though I'll carve out an exception for The Flash - I thought Zack Snyder did some extremely cool things with that power set).</p><p>There were aspects of this I'd have liked changed, sure. A few scenes were unnecessary, some elements and ideas didn't entirely make sense, and some of the non-effects sequences looked off to me, but overall... I just really enjoyed this. I'm not sure whether they're actually going to deliver on their promise these characters will return given the movie's lackluster reception, but if they can justify a sequel, I'll gladly watch it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)</b></p><p>Remember when people used to believe superhero movies couldn't work if they featured more than two villains? Proud to say I never bought that hypothesis: if you get the script right, you can fit almost any number of significant characters - heroes or villains - and deliver a good product. That doesn't mean you're not making it harder on yourself, but the people behind the MCU Spider-Man movies have never been afraid of a challenge.</p><p>This is an impressive movie, particularly if we're focusing on the script. It juggles a lot of characters, relationships, and ideas, and it does so surprisingly well. That's not to say it never fumbles - there are certainly moments it chooses fan service over a satisfying emotional arc - but it works far more often than not.</p><p>I will say some of the effects fall short of the writing. You can see where the limitations of shooting during a pandemic results in a product less polished than the material deserves. For what amounts to an Endgame-level event for the Spider-franchise, some key sequences really feel a generation behind in terms of production value.</p><p>But at the end of the day, the writing and acting pulls it through. It's really a fantastically made homage to the character's onscreen history, as well as an exploration of what makes Peter Parker compelling as a hero.</p><p>On a personal note, I have some reservations about the resolution, particularly as it pertains to relationships from past MCU installments. I understand and respect the choices made here, but I question whether the added flexibility for future solo Spider-Man movies counterbalances the lost connections and unanswered questions for the MCU as a whole.</p><p>That's all nerdy conjecture, though, and it doesn't really pertain to this movie on its own. No Way Home is an effective, funny, emotional Spider-Man story that wraps up a number of loose ends most of us wrote off years ago. It's a great movie despite some compositing mishaps and effects limitations. Overall, I enjoyed this.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Teen Titans Go! & DC Super Hero Girls: Mayhem in the Multiverse (2022)</b></p><p>The first and most surprising thing about this crossover team-up is it's not really a crossover or a superhero team-up. I mean, technically there's a crossover in it, and the two groups do briefly team-up, but the significance and screen time given to the Titans is grossly overstated. This is a Super Hero Girls movie with what's best described as an extended cameo from the Titans. Honestly, I suspect there was an earlier draft that didn't include them at all.</p><p>If so, I kind of wish they'd make that version. The Titans bits are funny, but they clash with the tone and focus of the movie. Aside from the Titans stuff, this is an unusually serious Super Hero Girls story. Granted, that's speaking relatively: the Super Hero Girls only get so serious, but this does walk up to that line. It's clearly intended as an extension of the series building on established character arcs and plot threads.</p><p>Each of the six heroines (actually, make that seven, due to... never mind: that'd be spoiling) has a story arc here, and they're all good. In contrast, none of the Titans do (at least not really), though Raven is given a good moment. </p><p>One thing worth noting is that you should really catch up with the series before tracking down the movie. I'm a season behind, and it actually did matter a bit. There were developments I wasn't aware of, though it wasn't hard to catch up.</p><p>Regardless, it's a strong movie with some great moments and jokes. I just think it would have hit a lot harder without the occasional cutaways to the Titans' antics, most of which felt tacked on and unnecessary.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-10557377950456262922023-02-20T14:06:00.003-08:002023-02-20T14:06:51.850-08:00Ten Recent-ish Movies You Need to See but Haven't <p>This is sort of an installment in my "Catch-Up" series of short reviews, but rather than filtering by genre, I'm highlighting some of the best movies of the past five or six years I suspect slipped under your radar. That means, I'm intentionally leaving off anything that did remotely well in theaters - to be eligible a movie basically needs to either have bombed, been released to a hilariously small number of screens, or gone right to streaming. And if it's the latter, it better not have been a major cultural milestone (e.g., Happiest Season isn't on this list, because everyone knows about it and most everyone's seen it). Likewise, no movies that already won dozens of major awards or franchise installments appear below. The point of this is to gather up the stuff I suspect you either haven't heard of or skipped and forgot about.</p><p>A few of these are movies I've discussed here in the past. They're not in any particular order - they're not ranked or anything - but all are worth checking out.</p><p><br /></p><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><p><b>Vesper (2022)</b></p><p>Technically, Vesper is a Lithuanian science-fiction film from last year, but it's difficult to convey how little that actually communicates about the experience of watching this fascinating, unique film. Imagine a live-action Miyazaki movie, fused with Terry Gilliam, centered around something from Grimm's Fairy Tales, and set in post-apocalyptic medieval Europe. Now picture that getting shipped into Area X from Annihilation. Vesper is basically the movie you'd expect to emerge a few weeks later.</p><p>Sounds pretty damn good, right? Yeah, well, it is.</p><p>Throw in some innovative visual effects (mostly practical) that are evocative, creepy, and hauntingly beautiful, and you've got something extraordinary. The setting and tone are so good, I barely even cared that the story was effective, the theme timely, the cast really good, and the characters all interesting: that stuff felt like icing. I'd be recommending this even if it weren't smart and well constructed, but as a nice bonus, it's both those things.</p><p>I should mention there's some disturbing imagery in here. Nothing too bad; just be aware there's some gnarly R-rated stuff in this that might make you squirm. And, for what it's worth, it belongs here. The freaky stuff enhances the world, and is eerily beautiful, like everything else in this film.</p><p></p><p>I didn't watch and review this in time to make my 2022 ranking, but if I had it would be in either the 2nd or 1st place. I really love this one, and strongly encourage fans of science-fiction or fantasy to check it out. It's truly special.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Cyrano (2022)</b></p><p>I never know whether to date these by technical release dates or US openings. If you prefer the former, than this was 2021, not 2022. But - despite being an absolutely fantastic musical reimagining of the classic story - Cyrano's release didn't really make much of a dent in either year. Pity. I really like this one.</p><p>I hardly know what to highlight. Everything from the costumes to the cinematography to the cast (Dinklage, in particular) is fantastic. But maybe the most memorable aspect is the music: I'd listen to these songs on their own. Stylistically, they lean towards pop/rock, and they're well written, well sung, and cleverly shot in ways blending the period of the setting with musical videos from eras being referenced. Think MTV meets Shakespeare in Love: it's a blast to watch and hear.</p><p>The closest thing I have to a criticism is the movie feels like it's being held back by the simplicity of the story it's telling. The psychology just doesn't hit as hard as the music, acting, or directing. But if the biggest problem I have with your adaptation of Cyrano de Bergerac is that it's still "just" Cyrano de Bergerac... well... that's not actually a shortcoming.</p><p>This is absolutely worth seeing if you haven't already. I wish a few of these fantastic musicals would make money - we're living through a renaissance in the genre, but it seems unlikely to last if these keep bombing at the box office. </p><div><p><br /></p><p><b>The Little Hours (2017)</b></p><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">I watched this having no idea what it was, when it took place, or what the tone was going to be. If you, too, don't know what "The Little Hours" is, go to Amazon (it's playing on Prime) and start watching (assuming there are no young children around). Do it now. Don't read the rest of this review, don't look at the synopsis, and FOR THE LOVE OF GOD do not watch the trailer.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Seriously. Avoid the trailer like the plague until you see the movie. Feel free to check it out after - it works well as a fun recap - but the real joy of The Little Hours comes from experiencing its surprises as they're offered. There are moments in the movie that had me howling with laughter in absolute delight - they wouldn't have had anywhere near the same impact if I'd been anticipating them. And the trailer gives them all away.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I'm going to avoid spoiling as much as possible, but - again - I highly recommend you watch this knowing as little as possible. I already feel bad revealing it's a comedy: the movie is built out of surprises, and that extends to the genre.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">A big part of what makes this work for me is the style. It's a comedy, but it isn't at all filmed like one. Everything in this, from the color palette to the lettering in the credits, evokes period dramas made in the 1960s and 70s, and - despite a cast of legendary comedians - this doesn't really wink or acknowledge that. It's shot very seriously and edited with straightforward music choices, and all of that highlights the absolute joyful absurdity of the film itself.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Only in some ways that description isn't doing the movie justice. The movie's comical approach hides the fact that, at least on occasion, it's absurd recreation of the past is likely more historically accurate than many of the self-serious dramas out there. One scene in particular (again, I'm really trying not to give anything away) had me in awe at how much more believable the characters' behavior was than perhaps any other movie I've seen set in a similar time.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I hope you stopped reading this a paragraph or two in and rushed to check it out. The Little Hours slipped under the radar in 2017 and seems to have largely disappeared since, and that's a tragedy. I'd easily rank this within the top 5 best comedies of the past decade I've seen, at least in terms of the overall joy I experienced watching it. Please, do yourself a favor and give this a chance.</div><div dir="auto"><p><br /></p><p><b>The House (2022)</b></p><p>Further eroding the line between movies and miniseries, I suspect Netflix's release, The House, was conceived as the latter but presented as the former. But the sake of simplicity, this was released as a single, movie-length anthology, so I'm going to take it as such. </p><p>Complicating issues around classification, this is officially a "dark comedy," but I don't see that at all. The first two stories are horror, while the third is sort of a surreal post-apocalyptic yarn. Sure, there are some comedic moments tossed in, but no more than you'd expect from the average horror flick (quite a bit less, in my opinion). I'm assuming this got labeled as comedy because two of the three parts feature anthropomorphic animals. But that's a feature of style, not of genre, and in this case it's liable to be misleading.</p><p>I should also note this one isn't for kids. The stories are actually kind of scary, and - while it pulls a few punches - things don't end particularly well for most of the main characters. Also, if you give a fuck about naughty words, this has a few. If you're looking to calibrate, I'd say you'd want to wait a few years for this after your kid's old enough to watch something like Coraline without nightmares. It's creepy, disturbing, and more mature than most people are used to seeing in this medium.</p><p>Whatever this is, it's absolutely breathtaking, a gorgeously animated stop-motion production exploring some very dark concepts. This explores the dangers of materialism, capitalism, and obsession. But at the same time, it's beautiful. Each of the three stories looks and feels unique. The first features characters and objects made of felt, similar to what <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/robin-robin-2021.html">Robin Robin</a> used but to quite literally the opposite effect. The second looks the most like something Laika might do if they wanted to traumatize their younger viewers (more than usual, I mean). And the third almost feels like it's channeling Wes Anderson via The Fantastic Mr. Fox.</p><p></p><p>I loved them all. The artistry on display is really incredible, and the tone is a good reminder that stop motion has applications beyond "kid's stuff." For those of you familiar with the 1988 Czech film, Něco z Alenky (you might know this as the adaptation of Alice in Wonderland with stop-motion taxidermy), this has a similar vibe. I'm really happy to see something this weird and pretty popping up on Netflix. What a treat.</p></div></div><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>See You Yesterday (2019)</b></p><p>While it could have used a bit more money, time, and maybe an additional draft to punch up a few key scenes, See You Yesterday is still a fascinating entry in the time-travel subgenre. It uses the concept of fate vs. will as a metaphor that's both effective and original, which is alone enough of a reason to check this out on Netflix. On top of that, it's well made and engaging as a genre flick, even setting aside the larger questions it's asking.</p><p>It's worth noting this is a bit deceptive. The movie begins as a sort of silly adventure, before ultimately veering into darker, heavier territory. I don't think this is a problem, but I suspect the tonal shift will be off-putting to audiences looking for easy answers and happy endings.</p><p>Which brings us into spoiler territory, because I don't think any discussion of See You Yesterday can proceed without touching on the resolution. Or perhaps lack thereof? I go back and forth on whether the last shot is tragic, optimistic, or ambiguous, which is likely the point. This is a movie about the sense of vertigo communities feel reliving what must feel like the same tragedies again and again. Structurally, the movie tells us Claudette's refusal to accept this is a tragic flaw. One interpretation of the ending is that she'll inevitably destroy herself trying to stop inevitable tragedy. In a sense, this is the easiest interpretation, as it adheres to traditional tropes and character archetypes. In a "normal" time travel story, a character who behaves as the protagonist does and ignores the warnings she refuses to accept is typically doomed.</p><p>But this isn't just a time travel story, and the thing Claudette trying to change isn't trivial or selfishly motivated. If anything, it feels like the movie is setting up the idea that fate should be accepted in order to dare us to confront the ramifications of apathy. In context, Claudette's response is the noble one, despite going against the conventional moral of the genre.</p><p>But the movie doesn't ultimately reward this with a happy ending. Instead, it closes with her continuing her mission, very possibly indefinitely or until it destroys her. Or, perhaps, until her refusal to accept the world as is overcomes the forces of inertia opposing her. In a sense, the movie is asking <i>us</i> which will win in the end: is the will to change greater than the cycle of loss?</p><p>And I wish I could say I found that ending uplifting. Perhaps it was supposed to be, but watching this four years later, I feel like the intervening time provided an answer. It's heartbreaking in retrospect, whether that was intended or not.</p><p><br /></p><div dir="auto"><b>Barb and Star go to Vista del Mar (2021)</b></div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I was completely unprepared for this movie.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I'm not sure where I got the idea that this was a light comedy with some drama, but that's what I was expecting: a conventional comedy. A simple movie built on tone. Nothing too extreme.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Imagine my surprise three minutes in when the supervillain showed up. This is a completely absurd, over-the-top farce. Imagine a middle-aged women's answer to Harold and Kumar, Bill and Ted, or... whatever the names of the characters were in Dude, Where's My Car.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Only those comparisons aren't exact. All of those movies are centered around young men and have fairly similar tones. Barb and Star are in their forties. That alone is game-changing, but this also looks and feels completely different. It's cartoonishly bright, with elaborate musical numbers. There are sequences that almost look like Wes Anderson with the saturation turned up. </div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">All of which is to say that while this feels like a spiritual cousin to the films listed above, it's not really in the same genre. If those are essentially stoner comedies, maybe this is a mimosa farce. Call it whatever you want, it feels fresh and new, which is extraordinarily rare. On its own, that's already enough a reason to recommend it.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">But also... it's completely hilarious. Just a riot, start to finish. I loved it.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">The one caveat I might offer is that it's <b>a lot</b> to take in. I ended up watching this in two parts, which was a good way to experience it: at almost two hours, it's a bit overwhelming without a break. I wouldn't call that a flaw - the movie never stops being funny - but I'm glad I saw this at home rather than in a theater.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">To be clear, if the biggest issue with your comedy is it's too much fun for one sitting... that's a pretty good sign. Definitely check this one out.</div><p><br /></p><p><b>Pig (2021)</b></p><p>It's admittedly a stretch including this here, as it picked up a fair number of awards and has been widely promoted by movie fans online. But it was snubbed at the Oscars, and it made virtually nothing in theaters (though, to be fair, it cost almost nothing to make, too).</p><p>And it is really fantastic. If you haven't seen it and know nothing about it, just stop reading now. The less you know, the better: this plays with your expectations and subverts your genre expectations in ways I never imagined.</p><p>Even aside from that, it's fantastic. This is one of Nicholas Cage's best performances, right up with Mandy (side note: I'm assuming you've all seen Mandy - otherwise, consider that an eleventh row on this list). Pig is an emotionally complex, philosophically moving film everyone should see. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>Petite Maman (2021)</b></p><p>I'm going to stagger how I describe this in the hopes anyone reading this review will stop as soon as possible then watch the movie before I even touch on the premise or genre. Let's start with the three pieces of information that convinced me to watch this the same day I heard it existed. First, it's written and directed by Céline Sciamma, the visionary who made Portrait of a Lady on Fire, which if you somehow haven't seen it... go watch that now, because it raises the bar for how good movies can look and be. Second, it's 72 minutes long, so it's not going to eat up your evening. Third, it's streaming on <a href="http://www.kanopy.com/">Kanopy</a>, a service you most likely have free access to if you have a library card in your wallet.</p><p>If that's enough, great, we're done here, at least until you've seen it, which - again - will only take an hour and change. It's not so much that I think knowing details about the movie will spoil it (this isn't that kind of movie), but there's no reason to rob yourself of the enjoyment of allowing the story to unfold in its own time. Because pacing and tone are major components in what makes this special. But you probably already figured that out from the "written and directed by Céline Sciamma" part.</p><p>I'll also add, for those still around, this one's appropriate for kids, provided they're old enough to manage the subtitles. Actually, a more accurate description would be "appropriate for adults," because (surprise) this is a kid's movie. As in, told from a child's point of view in ways that will resonate with a child and doesn't include objectionable material. Petite Maman is more or less G-rated.</p><p>But it's a kid's movie with depth, sincerity, and nuance. Think Prancer, as a reference point, or just go with the movies the director herself cited as inspiration: the works of Miyazaki.</p><p>Okay, see, now we're drifting dangerously close to revealing the genre, because this isn't just a beautifully told drama about a young girl coping with a difficult time and struggling to understand her mother. I mean, it's also that, and that'd be enough in the hands of a director like Sciamma, but...</p><p>It's also a time-travel story. Tonally, more fantasy time-travel than science-fiction, in that it doesn't care how or why it's occurring, doesn't contend with the usual tropes, and is instead only interested in the way the kids react to the magic around them. Which in this case can more or less be summed up as quiet amusement. She understands what's happening, appreciates the opportunity, and eventually discusses it with her mother's younger self, but neither express amazement or wonder at what's going on. It's just another thing they don't really understand in a world that's already more complicated than adults admit. So they do what kids do: they become friends, play, and talk.</p><p>Of course there are themes of growing up, of exploring the past, of coming to understand your parents as changing beings... and all that's really great. But what I found the most refreshing was a live-action movie with a realistic tone where kids just kind of casually explore a classic genre trope as if it's just another interesting path in the woods.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Blow the Man Down (2020)</b></p><p>This does for my home state of Maine what I imagine the Coen Brothers did for the Midwest: remind me why I left.</p><p>Okay, that's at least half a joke (I still love you, Maine), but this captures something about my home state in the months tourists stay away. It's a Maine of old buildings and towns built around industries that have been gone a generation. It's a ghost story where the ghost is the entire setting, where the people inhabit a spirit rather than the other way around.</p><p>This one came and went without garnering much attention, but it stayed with me.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Shadow in the Cloud (2020)</b></p><p>Yeah, I'm recommending this again. Probably not for the last time, either: I just love the hell out of this movie. It's weird and fascinating in ways horror and action movies never are. It pivots between genres brilliantly, exploiting a change in tone to enhance its story rather than break it. And the entire last act is just perfection, culminating in a final fight that breaks every rule in every book, delivering something that surprised and delighted me.</p><p>Be aware the credited writer is a horrible human being, but don't hold this against the movie. Based on some interviews I've read, it sounds like Director Roseanne Liang more or less rewrote the entire thing anyway.</p><p>Please, track this down. It's amazing.</p></div></div></div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-3501885518808824632023-01-03T19:30:00.001-08:002023-01-03T19:30:05.600-08:00Movie Review: Roald Dahl's Matilda the Musical<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYsx7jdT-Nb4GBLi5wopqQUNXq0baLtv5bgaTm7x0LCYNePdv2FmF-H-fcH6pphGVgq2cyPlzabYoVpk_l75f2apB_kauD0WcXpW8ar-mA6cF4LjXa1uxFs5E6fiRR-4QBVfVKHPTyyDYyptL4lui4bTZvArlOVSBkGK7womVSH7Q-DjtJvMUlhb4FA/s3609/PXL_20230104_031528463.PORTRAIT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2709" data-original-width="3609" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYsx7jdT-Nb4GBLi5wopqQUNXq0baLtv5bgaTm7x0LCYNePdv2FmF-H-fcH6pphGVgq2cyPlzabYoVpk_l75f2apB_kauD0WcXpW8ar-mA6cF4LjXa1uxFs5E6fiRR-4QBVfVKHPTyyDYyptL4lui4bTZvArlOVSBkGK7womVSH7Q-DjtJvMUlhb4FA/s320/PXL_20230104_031528463.PORTRAIT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>The thing that kept running through my head at a crucial yet objectively silly moment in the middle of this objectively silly story is there must have been a point when this was being planned and various members of the cast and crew were meeting with the director to ask how he wanted to handle the sequence in question. The design of the movie is fundamentally whimsical with flourishes of expressionism, it's all of course based on a children's book, and - I really can't stress this enough - the crux of the story hinges on the sort of ridiculous, bizarre revelation that defines Dahl's writing. And all I can imagine watching the finished film is director Matthew Warchus must have thought about for a moment and said something along the lines of, "Fuck it. Act like it's Shakespeare."</p><p>Because as silly as the premise, backstory, and designs are, as absurd as some of the cartoon physics and musical numbers get, the heart of this adaptation keeps returning to emotionally rich sequences built on honest depictions of trauma, hope, and pain. It's the kind of gambit directors rarely make in these kinds of movies, because when they don't work, the result is a mess of conflicting tones and melodrama. But in the rare circumstances it does work, you end up with the sort of bizarre, operatic masterpieces generations remember for the rest of their lives. The Last Unicorn, The Secret of N.I.M.H., Watership Down, Coraline... and now Roald Dahl's Matilda: the Musical.</p><p>I'm honestly not sure whether or not this will obtain the kind of cultural saturation to leave that kind of legacy behind, given the transitory nature of Netflix's business model. They don't really do much to promote their films, so this could end up buried in a week or two under the weight of their next eighty additions. But the kids who see this now are going to remember it. This is the right blend of nightmare fuel, honest emotion, and weird visuals that can set up shop inside a kid's head and lead them into a life of art.</p><p>Or maybe turn them into revolutionaries, because the politics of this thing aren't subtle. The movie shrugs off the adage "two wrongs can't make a right," then responds with a feature-length metaphor about how all methods of resistance are justified in the fight against fascism. Lies, subterfuge, violence, psychological warfare... whatever it takes. I haven't read the book this is based on since... I don't know... third grade maybe? So I honestly don't know how much of that subtext appeared in the original. My guess is it was there, but for a variety of reasons, it most likely wasn't obvious. Here, it's barely subtext. Kids probably won't entirely understand the message at first, but it could very well stick with them (fingers crossed).</p><p>There are several reasons this works, beyond the fact it's directed well. The cast deserves a great deal of credit here, particularly Alisha Weir and Lashana Lynch, who play Matilda and Miss Honey. Together, they form the emotional center of the movie, and this would have failed if either hadn't been able to convey real depth at several key moments. Emma Thompson should also be celebrated, as she delivers a phenomenally over-the-top villainous performance in a mech suit's worth of Oscar-caliber prosthetics and makeup. The movie could probably still have worked without her, but it wouldn't have been as much fun. The whole ensemble is good, really, including a small army of children who sell some elaborate song and dance scenes.</p><p>Speaking of, the songs are good. I realize that's a carryover from the play, but that doesn't change the fact it's enjoyable to listen to. More importantly, the music manages to enhance tone, develop themes, and add depth to the characters' emotional journeys: you know, all that stuff songs are supposed to do in musicals.</p><p>I should note my wife, who has an actual background in theater, detected artifacts where songs were likely cut down or references were omitted. She still liked the movie, but wasn't quite as impressed as I was.</p><p>I should also mention some minor characters felt underutilized. Matilda's classmates, in particular, felt more like references to the book than characters in their own right. I don't consider this a major flaw, but it's one area where the movie could have used more time. Fingers crossed for an extended cut, I suppose.</p><p>Regardless, this is a fantastic movie. I really hope kids discover it: this is the kind of movie a generation could watch when they're seven and find themselves discussing in college.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-47706562751506992202022-12-31T06:51:00.003-08:002023-01-02T18:26:12.624-08:002022 Retrospective<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipuVuj_rqX1DEgkmmFkByv1ZqDm1JPOshWaNPSJlrHNJ95qkmSN5LLqROloms0zibrlXFyjkgjY1PeAb6Fhru9RUiHU_YLS8yEhhzHWaYD8OQ3obYsCHHR9XbSgM6DEdnR6pguxkaWMSTRSFw7vN5PTaKB8HHvft68FiQ_j7VqlzzCi5eNsBbi9Gf1Yw/s3373/PXL_20221231_033056811.MP.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2508" data-original-width="3373" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipuVuj_rqX1DEgkmmFkByv1ZqDm1JPOshWaNPSJlrHNJ95qkmSN5LLqROloms0zibrlXFyjkgjY1PeAb6Fhru9RUiHU_YLS8yEhhzHWaYD8OQ3obYsCHHR9XbSgM6DEdnR6pguxkaWMSTRSFw7vN5PTaKB8HHvft68FiQ_j7VqlzzCi5eNsBbi9Gf1Yw/s320/PXL_20221231_033056811.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>I know posts here have been pretty sparse. This past year, I largely turned my attention towards another project, watching and reviewing <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/">as many versions of A Christmas Carol as I possibly could</a>. Because that took a lot of time, I didn't really review much here.</p><p>But that doesn't mean I wasn't watching new stuff and taking notes. And that means it's time for my answer to the annual "best of" tradition. Only I've never really been able to stick to those limitations. I like to show my work and offer context, so here's everything released in 2022 I finished watching, ranked from least favorite to most favorite.</p><p>Let me take a minute and reiterate that: least <b>favorite</b> to most <b>favorite</b>. This is how I felt about what's listed below, not my opinion of their quality. In fact, there's something in my bottom 5 this year I think is kind of better than something in my top 10.</p><p>I also want to mention I'm doing something very different this year: these aren't just movies. I've got seasons of TV shows and even a few specials in the mix. Television has improved to the point it's able to seriously compete with theatrical films, and it's time to stop pretending there's a meaningful boundary.</p><p>Because of the way television works, we're obviously going to need some guidelines. I'm counting seasons as complete works, so the year the final episode airs or is released determines whether it applies. In other words, Willow (which I'm loving so far) will have to wait for next year. Also, I'm only considering shows I've seen in their entirety, which obviously means the bulk of this list is going to skew towards stuff I like (excluding a bunch of Christmas stuff gathered near the bottom).</p><p>As a word of warning, this is going to run long, because it's a long list. I'm including quite literally everything I saw that was released in 2022, and it turns out that's a lot. Some of these will be accompanied by short explanations of why they're ranked where they are; others will have more or less complete reviews, so skim accordingly.</p><p>Let's get started.</p><p><br /></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART ONE: DISAPPOINTMENTS </span></b></p><p><b>74. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/mickey-saves-christmas-2022.html">Mickey Saves Christmas</a></b></p><p>I should probably feel bad about including a half hour special on this list, but I don't. Stop-motion, even when it's done cheaply, is still a pretty versatile artform, so there's no reason twenty-four minutes of it can't offer a phenomenal experience. I've seen specials made with less that left me breathless with wonder or falling off my chair laughing. This left me empty.</p><p>Actually, "empty" is a good descriptor for this special. Empty, vapid, and soulless, Mickey Saves Christmas is a reminder that stop-motion doesn't have to be good. As a medium, it tends attract great artists who find ways to bring their creations to life. But this wasn't life: it was corporate branding. I've never found this medium or these characters less interesting in my life. They're written and animated without a shred of inspiration or joy. What a waste of effort and talent.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>73. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/a-unicorn-for-christmas-2022.html">A Unicorn for Christmas</a></b></p><p>Okay, I actually do feel a little bad about this one. A Unicorn for Christmas is here in part because it's a extremely low-budget production that falls short of the mark. Sometimes these manage to overcome their limitations, but this isn't one of those times.</p><p>I really don't want to harp on this: I was already mean enough in my review, and frankly it just didn't have the resources to compete. Let's just say I'm including this in the interest of being complete and move on. </p><p><br /></p><div dir="auto"><b>72. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/11/falling-for-christmas-2022.html">Falling for Christmas</a></b></div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I haven't loved any of Netflix's Christmas princess romcoms, though there have been a few I thought were solid. I realize Falling for Christmas technically doesn't feature a princess, but that "technically" is doing some heavy lifting. At any rate, when these sort of work, it's because they embrace the camp and have fun with the ensuing chaos. Falling for Christmas just isn't fun. The premise, a subdued version of Overboard's, just isn't zany enough to carry one of these.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Meanwhile, the elements that actually are as weird as this needs to be (namely Santa and the rival love interest) fall on the bad end of weird, rather than the endearing.</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">I know these movies have fans, and I truly wish I saw whatever they see in these.</div><p><br /></p><p><b>71. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/holiday-heritage-2022.html">Holiday Heritage</a></b></p><p>Hallmark's first Kwanzaa movie didn't work as well for me as their first Hanukkah flick (we'll get to that). The issue here is genre: while I've been pleasantly surprised by Hallmark's comedies this year, their dramas haven't been as effective. The network's mandate for exclusively G-rated fare with little -to-no tension just doesn't leave enough room for the writers to build anything compelling.</p><p>That's the problem here. The emotional stakes just ring hollow, and without a significant amount of humor to distract you, you're just left bored.</p><p>My suggestion is either to drop non-fantasy dramas entirely or (even better) allow these to at least climb up closer to PG. This just doesn't work otherwise.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>70. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/a-christmas-story-christmas-2022.html">A Christmas Story Christmas</a></b></p><p>The awkward thing about A Christmas Story Christmas is it's actually pretty good. They set out to mimic the style of the 1983 movie and they pulled it off. The new movie looks, sounds, and feels like a continuation, which couldn't have been easy. What they did is impressive.</p><p>But here's the catch: I hate the original, so I'm not too keen on this one, either. I find the jokes unfunny, the characters unlikeable, and the story dull for the exact same reasons I didn't like those the first time.</p><p>That doesn't mean I don't respect what was done here - I just don't like it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>69. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/11/christmas-at-golden-dragon-2022.html">Christmas at the Golden Dragon</a></b></p><p>There are things about Christmas at the Golden Dragon I respect, starting with the premise. The idea of centering a Christmas drama around a location typically used as a punchline has merit, and it's genuinely good to see Hallmark actually featuring diversity for a change. I also like how this subverts a number of tropes and stereotypes (though it still checks off a few - this is still a Hallmark flick, after all).</p><p>The problem is the movie isn't good. Hell, "bad" might be a generous designation: the dialogue and character work here is just abysmal.</p><p>In fact, the only reason this claws its way up this far is there's one scene that at least partially redeems the movie by featuring characters who aren't dressed and acting like normal Hallmark Christmas characters reacting realistically to some who are. It's a surprisingly clever moment in an otherwise dumb film.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>68. Kimi</b></p><p>On paper, this must have seemed like a brilliant idea. Take the basic premise of Rear Window (a movie I should probably see one of these days) and update it via modern technology, all set in the uniquely isolated wasteland that is the pandemic: that should add up to a suspenseful, modern noir, right? RIGHT?</p><p>It probably should have, but even with a fantastic performance from Zoe Kravitz, Kimi is a disappointment. Rather than deliver something cutting edge or a great throwback, it splits the difference and somehow comes off feeling like something out of the 1990s. More than anything, this reminds me of The Net, a movie I haven't seen or thought about since I watched it on VHS.</p><p>Kimi really needed to feel harrowing, and - frankly - it just doesn't. The protagonist is intriguingly flawed in some interesting ways, but none of these actually manifest into meaningful obstacles to her ability to maneuver the plot. Of all the movie's disappointments, this was the most bizarre: there were plenty of opportunities to have her agoraphobia impact the plot. Instead, it just... didn't.</p><p>Likewise, there were several poorly timed continuity glitches, both helping and hurting the protagonist. As always, I'm trying to avoid spoilers, but there was a moment towards the end when Kravitz's character conveniently shook off the influence of a powerful sedative. Granted, that facilitated a fairly delightful climactic showdown, which was completely out of place in this movie but more than welcome. </p><p>It's difficult to take anything in this movie seriously, which is a problem given the tone wants you to take everything seriously (at least until the end, I suppose). But between the fuzzy logic, the pedantic lecturing about the dangers of a world without privacy, and the lack of attention to detail in something masquerading as hard SF, I found myself laughing at this in ways I don't believe were intentional.</p><p>Again, for what it's worth, Kravitz is great here. And if Soderbergh wanted to pick up a paycheck, he's more than earned to right to phone one of these in. But this definitely felt like just that: a hastily written script calibrated for pandemic filming limitations and made on the cheap for a streaming platform. The ending was fun, and the whole thing was diverting enough, but on the whole this felt closer to an above average TV movie than a "real" movie. I realize films produced for streaming can be either, so maybe I'm being unfair. And I'll be the first to admit it's landing behind quite a few movies far worse (I mean, look at what's next) because I expected more from this given the talent involve. But expectation is a real factor in the experience of watching a movie, and this one really didn't measure up.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>67. Morbius</b></p><p>I watched Morbius the way I'm convinced it was meant to be seen: barely conscious and suffering through fever and other side effects of a COVID booster. In the interest of full disclosure, my fever dissipated over the course of the film's runtime. Am I suggesting that Morbius somehow magically cured me?</p><p>Yes, that is precisely what I'm suggesting.</p><p>The point is, my experience with this movie was not, strictly speaking, typical. Really, I should watch it again to make sure I'm not conflating my reaction to the vaccine with the quality of the film. I should. I know I should. I just... really don't want to.</p><p>I actually think I liked this a little better than most people. I thought some of the CG fight effects looked neat, particularly the weird super-speed thing they kept doing. Same goes for the "vampire-face" effect they used with Morbius: it's weird and comic-y, which are ingredients I almost always like.</p><p>I also don't think the movie is <i>quite</i> as bad as its reputation, with the caveat the word "quite" is doing some heavy lifting in the first half of this sentence. The story and characters are absolutely bad, but I'd describe them as "Ben Affleck Daredevil-bad," as opposed to "Origins Wolverine-Bad." In other words, it's not good, but I've definitely seen worse.</p><p><br /></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART TWO: FINE, I GUESS</span></b></p><p><b>66. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/the-santa-clauses-season-1-2022.html">The Santa Clauses</a></b></p><p>Eh. Honestly, it was better than I thought it would be. I've never liked the movies, and I'm not a huge fan of Tim Allen (and not <i>just</i> because of his politics). But this manages to salvage the franchise with a twist that untwists the original twist defining the movies. By the end, we're left with a take on Santa closer to the default cultural figure than the rules established in the first movie (to say nothing of the sequels). And some of the revamped lore is cool - I really liked the Yuleverse, though it was a little weird La Befana wasn't part of that tradition - and the sequences with the Calvin-Clauses in Chicago were fun. </p><p>Still, most of the jokes failed to land, and I had to slog through two and a half episodes of tedious setup to get to the decent stuff. This isn't good compared to most television today, though it would have been one of the best things on fifteen years ago (TV has gotten really good lately).</p><p>At the end of the day, this is passable, which is certainly more than I expected.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>65. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/11/three-wise-men-and-baby-2022.html">Three Wise Men and a Baby</a></b></p><p></p><p>This was one of the first 2022 Hallmark Christmas movies I saw, and I was pleasantly surprised. I certainly didn't love it - the movie mostly exists for fan service, and I'm not really a fan - but it's pretty decent compared to what I was expecting. The cast does good work, and the premise is as good a match as any for the glossy, cartoonish Hallmark esthetic. And, for what it's worth, I laughed more than once during the first half of the movie, which ain't nothing.</p><p>That said, the last act slows to a crawl, and the emotional punches are weak (kind of a running problem with the company). Still, this was good enough to make it this far, and we've still got several Hallmark movies to go.</p><div><br /></div><div><b>64. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/a-christmas-karen-2022.html">A Christmas Karen</a></b></div><p>It's no surprise this movie wasn't a slam dunk. What was surprising was it kind of came close. As a reimagined take on A Christmas Carol, this was fairly clever in how it updated and transformed the text while retaining both the underlying story, moral, and politics of the original. On top of that, some of the jokes were fantastic.</p><p>Note I said "some." Unfortunately, a large number feel even more tired than its dated title. But that's not the real issue here. The reason this doesn't quite manage to thread the needle is it can't seem to decide whether it wants to be a zany parody or a comedic retelling of A Christmas Carol. It kind of oscillates between these extremes, never committing or getting them to coalesce (to be fair, the last section does a decent job at this, but it's not enough to really make the film work).</p><p>All that said, the good at least counterbalances the bad: on the whole I thought this movie was pretty decent, which is more than you'd expect from a low-budget holiday comedy named after what's essentially an internet meme. The filmmakers overdelivered here, and deserve credit: this is in no way a failure.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>63. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/ghosts-of-christmas-always-2022.html">Ghosts of Christmas Always</a></b></p><p>I genuinely enjoyed this, which isn't something I usually say about Hallmark productions. But aside from some issues with the ending, this was surprisingly intelligent, both in terms of dialogue and structure.</p><p>It's that ending that holds it back. It's not so much that it goes in a bad direction, as it's not clear what happens or what it means in terms of timelines and reality. On one hand, it's the kind of detail that usually doesn't matter much. But in this case, there's so much continuity and lore tied up in what's going on, someone waving a wand and assuring us it all ended well just doesn't cut it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>62. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/scrooge-christmas-carol-2022.html">Scrooge: A Christmas Carol</a></b></p><p>Despite being a mess of a movie, this CG animated quasi-remake of the 1970 live-action Scrooge musical looks beautiful. The designs are fantastic, and character expressions and physicality convey emotion. It sounds good, too: the songs are revamped (or as often as not outright replaced) to make them fun to listen to.</p><p>But while it all looks and sounds good on the surface, there was no real effort made to coalesce the various elements into a coherent movie. You've got clockwork designs, 1970's record album colors, an animal companion, new story elements, and a somewhat dark tone. A lot of the component parts are good on their own, but the whole is less than... well, you know the cliché.</p><p>I really think this has merit thanks to the quality of the designs and animation, but it's a deeply flawed film that failed to draw me in any deeper.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>61. The Book of Boba Fett</b></p><p>Taken as a whole, this was kind of a mess. The series drops its central narrative four episodes in to pivot to other characters and lore. The weakest episode by far focuses intently on a digitally recreated Skywalker training Grogu. It's all absurd and unnecessary.</p><p>And yet... I enjoyed it.</p><p>Look, at the end of the day, recycled Star Wars is still Star Wars. I grew up with this stuff - even if I find myself wincing at absurd choreography and mangled plot structure, I can't help but get excited when I return to that galaxy.</p><p>That doesn't mean I can't see the flaws, nor does it mean I don't wish for more. This series - hell, everything being done with this franchise even before Disney bought it - feels so much smaller than it should. They're focusing on explanations and backstory rather than wonder. This is supposed to be set in a galaxy, with countless alien species. Why do we keep returning to the same handful of worlds with the same dozen or so creatures?</p><p>I'm hoping Disney figures that out soon. They're pouring a lot of money into this, and the creative teams are incredibly talented. I just wish we were seeing more imagination and less rehashing.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>60. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/the-holiday-sitter-2022.html">The Holiday Sitter</a></b></p><p>Let's just take a moment and appreciate the fact a Hallmark romcom made it higher than one of the Star Wars entries. Yes, there's more Star Wars later, but I still think it's kind of incredible.</p><p>The movie itself was sweet and amusing. The comedy was well delivered, though it's the kind of thing that has you chuckling, rather than laughing. The script and directing were fine, but the real MVP here was Jonathan Bennett, who delivers a fantastic comedic performance for the first 95% of the movie before catching you completely off guard with a character twist I found genuinely moving, which feels revolutionary in a Hallmark romcom.</p><p>For all its merits, this is still formulaic and over-reliant on clichés: in other words, it's still a made-for-TV Hallmark romantic comedy. And, in case it wasn't clear, I'm not a huge fan of that niche genre, so this is pretty much the ceiling unless one of these actually bothers subverting and reinventing the conventions of that genre. Don't hold your breath for anything like that - I'm pretty sure Hallmark execs stamp out that kind of dissention. But then they used to stamp out anything without a straight lead, so who knows? Maybe in a few years Hallmark will evolve again and start making great movies. There's really nothing stopping them but themselves.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>59. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/03/movie-review-adam-project.html">The Adam Project</a></b></p><p>I know this is damning with faint praise, but The Adam Project really feels like a movie best summed up as "good enough." It's a long way from great, but as far as direct-to-streaming kids/family sci-fi/adventure flicks go... it's fairly enjoyable to watch.</p><p>Could it have been better? Sure! A few script revisions, less stunt casting (I can't be the only one who found Ruffalo extremely distracting in this thing), and a moratorium on self-aware references to other movies the stars have been in would have done wonders. With minimal work, this could actually have crossed the line into being <b>actually</b> good.</p><p>But for a direct-to-streaming MCU knock-off, this is already so much better than it should be. Whether that qualifies as good or not is more a function of what you're comparing it to than anything else. And at the end of the day, I enjoyed this overall. Not a homerun, by any stretch, but not everything has to be.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>58. Black Adam</b></p><p>Better than Morbius, but not as good as Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness... yeah, I think I've got this in more or less the right spot. It's honestly hard to tell sometimes.</p><p>Black Adam, to be fair, makes a lot of interesting choices. I like that the Justice Society are effectively co-leads here, though this would have worked much better conceptually if it had been set in the 50's rather than the present day. There are some good performances (I really liked Aldis Hodge as Hawkman), and I love that they made the various powersets look unique.</p><p>But the movie has two major flaws that more or less invalidate everything else: it's lacking enough fun characters and moments to anchor the tone, and the whole thing looks and feels like a videogame cutscene.</p><p>On the first point, Atom Smasher and Cyclone had potential, but they never got the screen time or focus to feel like anything more than extended cameos. Also, Cyclone's powers, while cool looking, weren't really put to much use - for the most part, she just tossed metal pipes around.</p><p>As for the CG, it wasn't exactly bad, so much as overwhelming and lacking realism. That's not automatically a deal breaker (in this space, we honor Speed Racer), but it only works if it fits the movie. And, again, this was going for something of an epic, brooding tone, rather than a zany, campy adventure. If the movie looked like this, the script needed to be more like Aquaman or Thor: Ragnarok and less, well, Thor: The Dark World.</p><p>Despite all that, the JSA were entertaining enough to crawl this far up the list. And Adam was pretty good, too - The Rock was always a good fit for the character. But I spent most of this movie in a state of boredom, which is kind of shocking given it features super-wizards and a reincarnated winged space hero fighting a demon.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>57. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness</b></p><p>All right, we're going to need to look at Multiverse of Madness from a couple different points of view. As a standalone movie, this just doesn't work. The villain, her motivation, and to a lesser extent the plot in general is essentially a continuation of WandaVision, to the point the movie sacrifices any real setup to instead recap the essential story beats that are carrying over. Taken on its own, this is a mess.</p><p>That said, if you look at this as an installment in a larger story... it's actually even more of a mess. Because they're not actually picking up from where WandaVision resolved: instead, they're just kind of retconning out her character growth and development, since those wouldn't really be convenient to the story being told instead. It's ostensibly tied together, but you can see where the strings are frayed. You're left with a movie sacrificing internal logic for the connected story, but also sacrificing that for cheap shock value.</p><p>Which isn't to say there's nothing of value here. Visually, this delivers some awesome moments. They're also completely cutting loose on the magic end of genre storytelling: no more halfhearted attempts to handwave this as misunderstood technology or energy manipulation or whatever. This is straight up, unapologetic mystic nonsense, and I really appreciate that.</p><p>But it's not enough to make up for the shortcomings. Likewise, the cameos were fun, but a host of alt-Earth Marvel characters appearing simply to get brutally killed was obnoxious. Just more shock value that's far less interesting than the movie supposes.</p><p>Even with a number of cool moments and images, this firmly lands in last place on the list of MCU films. Congrats to Thor: The Dark World on no longer being the worst.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>56. Sonic the Hedgehog 2</b></p><p>According to my rough estimate, around 85% of Sonic 2 is just plain bad. Really bad. Cloying, idiotic humor, bad writing where situations are manufactured by filmmakers trusting their audience isn't paying enough attention to remember characters' superpowers should be more than sufficient to render threats meaningless, side plots that drag out far too long...</p><p>Most of the remaining 15% isn't exactly good, either: it's more a mix of "so bad it's good" and "dumb fun."</p><p>And yet, for reasons I don't entirely understand, I kind of enjoyed this overall. Maybe the stuff I consider "dumb fun" is just fun enough to overcome my reservations about the cheesy kid's movie junk that eats up most of the runtime. Or maybe I'm just a sucker for cute CG animals forming friendships. I can't really explain it: I had a decent time with enough of this to give it a pass. Barely.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>55. Catwoman: Hunted</b></p><p>This was a low-budget direct-to-streaming movie I'm assuming most people never heard of. They make quite a few of these, most of which I get around to years later, if at all. There was a time I lived for this kind of stuff, but over the past fifteen years or so, the quality of animated comic book films has dipped while the live-action stuff has gotten better and better. I'm happy to say this is an exception. Well, more like half an exception.</p><p>The animation itself is pretty underwhelming. They clearly didn't pour a great deal of money into it, and it shows. Fortunately, the writing, directing, and voice acting more than makes up for that shortcoming. This is a long way from the top tier of DC Animated films out there (Mask of the Phantasm, The Red Hood, Batman vs. TMNT, New Frontier, etc.), but as a somewhat disposable piece of ridiculous entertainment, it's a great deal of fun.</p><p>A lot of credit goes to writer Greg Weisman, who's responsible for Gargoyles, Spectacular Spider-Man, and Young Justice (for those of you who aren't fans of this stuff, those are widely regarded as three of the best animated action/adventure series ever made). This isn't on par with most of his TV work, but it's still quite good as a Catwoman team-up (I'll refrain from spoiling who the other lead is, since it's supposed to be a surprise).</p><p>The mediocre quality of the animation along with some obnoxious moments keep this from ranking higher, but I really did have fun with this.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>54. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/04/movie-review-moonshot.html">Moonshot</a></b></p><p>Moonshot is not at all an ambitious movie. It sets out to be a breezy, family-friendly romcom with a science fiction setting. It offers very little beyond that premise, but - by virtue of actually bothering to write some solid dialogue and cast good actors - it manages to deliver something fun.</p><p>If you're looking for something exceptional, this isn't the movie for you. It's not memorable, it doesn't have much to say, and the emotional beats are all pretty muted. But it's not really trying to do any of that: it just wants to be enjoyable and sweet. In short, it's passable.</p><div><b><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></b></div><div><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART THREE: I LIKED IT</span></b></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b>53. Belle</b></div><div><br /></div><div>I know this technically came out in 2021, but I'm counting it because it had a US release this year.</div><div><br /></div><div>This was weirder than I expected, and I went in expecting something pretty damn weird. I expected to see a retelling of Beauty and the Beast set in a virtual world, but - while elements of the classic tale are present - the movie refuses to adhere to the template. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing: at the very least, it's more ambitious and surprising. I'm not sure I found the film as satisfying an experience, however, largely because the twists in the second half felt entirely out of left field.</div><div><br /></div><div>Regardless, the movie is beautiful, and the virtual world - unlike the similar one in Ready Player One - feels like one you'd want to visit. </div></div><div><br /></div><div><p><b>52. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/05/movie-review-chip-n-dale-rescue-rangers.html">Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers</a></b></p><div>The main reason this is as high as it is comes down to world-building, which is an aspect of genre filmmaking I don't think gets enough respect. The story and characters of the Rescue Rangers reboot are pretty simplistic, but the design and execution of a modern world inhabited by characters drawn from a century of diverse styles of animation, CG, puppeteering, and more is engrossing and whimsical. There's real art here, and I think that fact gets lost among the jokes.</div><p>It helps this is funny, too. Maybe not as funny as it could or should have been, but still funny. I also think the resolution to the central story arc between the title characters was a success.</p><p>That said, there are many, many aspects that just didn't work, beginning with the human co-lead. After managing to blend countless animation styles into the real world, somehow the place they came up short was a human being. On top of that, the story and villain just weren't all that interesting.</p><p>Overall, this was a decent movie, far better than it probably had any right to be, but disappointing in spots. I enjoyed it, but it's nowhere near the top of my list. </p><div><br /></div></div><div><br /></div><div><b>51. Lightyear</b></div><div><br /></div><div>What an utterly bizarre film. It's not at all bad, but it's also nowhere near good enough to justify its existence. Both after and while watching, I found myself trying and failing to wrap my head around the core idea. Why did anyone at Pixar want to make this in the first place?</div><div><br /></div><div>My best guess is this started as a fairly straightforward desire to make a tribute to classic science fiction films, or perhaps the genre in its entirety. The movie's full of references and homages, and these are the moments when it feels like the most attention and effort is pouring in. There's stuff here evocative of 2001, Starship Troopers, Star Wars, Star Trek, Galaxy Quest, and more.</div><div><br /></div><div>But the movie undermines this (at least for me) by opening with a tag explicitly telling us this is a fictional movie released in 1995 within the universe of Toy Story. It's honestly more the 1995 part than the Toy Story stuff, though I'll circle back to that. The opening primed me for a nostalgic '90s sci-fi experience. I was honestly curious how this rather complex setting would be presented.</div><div><br /></div><div>Then it wasn't. I mean, there were references to some '90s SF movies, along with numerous other eras, but Lightyear feels nothing like a film from that decade. This clearly wasn't actually conceived as a "lost" film from the '90s translated to animation, which might have been an interesting premise.</div><div><br /></div><div>Likewise, it doesn't really feel like a movie existing within the world of Toy Story. Even setting aside the date, the designs are clearly backwards engineered from Toy Story, rather than the other way around. I'll be the first to admit I'm being pedantic, but things like the toy looking like a relatively faithful recreation isn't accurate to action figures of the time. Buzz Lightyear the action figure looks like toys from the 1990s - Buzz Lightyear the character does <b>not</b> look like the characters those toys are based on.</div><div><br /></div><div>This shouldn't matter, and to most audiences I doubt they do. But because the premise of this is so tied to a metanarrative, I found myself exploring the details, looking for elements that would have sold the story-within-a-story concept. And frankly, they just weren't there. That bothered me.</div><div><br /></div><div>All that being said, this was still pretty good. There was some great action, some cool visuals, and - again - some really delightful homages to the history of the genre. But on top of my issues with the premise, the dialogue, comedy, characters, and story were a long way from Pixar's best. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>50. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/hanukkah-on-rye-2022.html">Hanukkah on Rye</a></b></div><div>Wait. Is Hallmark <b>good</b> now? This movie's a late addition, so I might be contradicting things I said elsewhere on this list, but... maybe? The bulk of Hallmark movies I watched this year were at least decent, and this one was genuinely well written. It broke several of Hallmark's self-imposed holiday rules against including tension. Granted, you never doubt the leads are going to end up together, but the path to get there isn't anywhere near as watered down as I'm used to from the studio. That's on top of likeable characters, good jokes, and some thematic resonance.</div><div><br /></div><div>I have no idea how representative the movies I saw this year are (Hallmark released more than 40 new holiday movies in 2022). But if you'd asked me a year ago if Hallmark made *any* movies this good, I'd have said no.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>49. The Sandman, Season 1</b></div><div>My feeling towards this show are mixed, and I really mean that. There's stuff here I truly love, starting with the bulk of the design and effects. It's a gorgeous-looking show that manages to recreate the look of key moments and characters better than I'd expected from something with a TV budget, streaming or not. This isn't trivial, either: the art of Sandman is extremely important to the overall effects, and successfully adapting that is an achievement in its own right.</div><div><br /></div><div>Likewise, I think the cast in this is largely great. They made some smart decisions when casting this thing, and it shows. Tom Sturridge's voice alone captures the essence of what's on the page, which - in the case of Sandman - is saying something. Throw in the fantastic bonus episode, and you might be forgetting I started this by saying my feelings were mixed, rather than positive.</div><div><br /></div><div>Here's the thing. As much as I enjoy looking at this, the show just doesn't manage to recreate the elements that make the comic as amazing as it is. Part of me think it's an issue with format: doing this as an hour-long TV series with each episode assigned one or two issues just can't work. Or maybe it's just a case where the showrunners are retreating too quickly to drama. Either way, the flow is off. The comic feels like a fairytale (or perhaps even a dream), and a lot of that's due to the way the story flows. I rarely got the same feeling from the show, and I think a lot of that's due to the pacing. The impact of key moments is diminished in the scope of an hour of television, so lines or dialogue that came across as poetically moving in the comic now feel tacked on and trivial.</div><div><br /></div><div>I still want more, of course. There's enough "good stuff" for me to latch onto as a fan of the comics to make the experience addicting. But even with a budget this high and talent this good, the show still feels like a lesser version of a great story.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>48. Jurassic World: Dominion</b></div><div><br /></div><div>When it comes to Jurassic Park, I feel like I've seen a different movie than the rest of the world. Everyone talks about the film like it's a gorgeously produced sci-fi/horror masterpiece with compelling characters and believable stakes. Every time I've watched it, I've just seen a solid B-adventure flick with innovative effects. The world never feels real, the characters feel two-dimensional, and the story comes off as contrived.</div><div><br /></div><div>I bring that up, because - to my mind at least - Dominion feels <i>exactly </i>like a sequel to the original. Way more so than any of the subsequent installments, aside from maybe The Lost World. It's nowhere near as good as the first, of course (Trevorrow is no Spielberg), but a string of absurd adventure sequences with little connective tissue and less meaning doesn't strike me as a betrayal of the series: with the possible exception of Fallen Kingdom, that's more or less how I'd describe the franchise.</div><div><br /></div><div>And at the very least, this delivers on quantity. Everything in this movie is silly and over-the-top, but damned if there's not a lot of it. The first half is almost a Bond film, showcasing various locations all over the planet. I'd have preferred if the whole movie had held to this, incidentally, rather than transitioning to yet another high-tech park prone to mishap. But whatever: the game preserve sequences were still fun, despite an utter lack of internal consistency and logic.</div><div><br /></div><div>To be clear, this is a movie to laugh at rather than with, but the sheer volume of characters and action set pieces kept me entertained. Once I got over the fact this wasn't going to deliver anything serious or even coherent, I just sat back and enjoyed the ride.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>47. The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, Season 1</b></div><div><br /></div><div>This show has so many positives and negatives, it's difficult to figure out where it balances out. Granted, the positives all boil down to variations on, "They spent a billion dollars to make this look like a movie," but that ain't nothing. I'd actually argue it counts for a great deal, at least as far as the experience of watching is concerned. This is incredible to look at and - as long as you're not paying attention to the dialogue - to listen to, as well. It's beautiful. And that's not simply a factor of budget: the people who designed and built this (both physically and digitally) did fantastic work. There's real art here.</div><div><br /></div><div>What's missing is, well, a worthwhile premise. To the extent this is adapting Tolkien, it's pulled from what amounts to a handful of pages in the Appendices of Return of the King. And frankly it shows: the story being told is simple, and the methods they've used to pad it out lost their luster fast. I loved the Harfoots when they first appeared, but by the end of the season, I found them as boring as all the other plotlines. Well, almost.</div><div><br /></div><div>And yet I'm still onboard for season 2, assuming it actually materializes. It really is incredible to look at, and the action sequences are quite good. Here's hoping they find a way to make these characters more compelling.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b>46. My Father's Dragon</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div>This is definitely taking a hit from expectations, but considering this is the studio behind The Secret of Kells, Song of the Sea, The Breadwinner, and Wolfwalkers, I think I can be forgiven from expecting a lot.</div><div><br /></div><div>What we get here is good, both technically and artistically. The animation is gorgeous (because of course it is), the voice cast does good work, and direction is good. Where it falls apart a little is story and premise. I haven't read the book this is based on, but judging from the movie, I'm not sure it was a good fit for adaptation, particularly for Cartoon Saloon. It all still works well enough, but the whimsical, childhood world clashes with the more cerebral fantasy at the core of the studio: it just feels off.</div><div><br /></div><div>Again, there's enough to enjoy here to make it more than worth seeing, but each film in the Irish Folklore Trilogy left me in awe. My Father's Dragon doesn't have anything with that kind of emotional power or artistic brilliance. It's a good animated kid's movie, and if it had been any other studio behind it, I'd mostly likely be singing its praises. But that's the problem with producing masterpieces: everyone expects more of you.</div></div><div><br /></div><div><p><b>45. Paper Girls, Season 1</b></p><p>Sometimes I think about how the last decade has completely broken my expectations for television. This is almost certainly better than at least 95% of the shows I watched prior to streaming, and now... I mean, it's good! Really good! I enjoyed watching this, remained curious where it was headed, found myself engaged by the twists...</p><p>But at the end of the journey (or hopefully this leg of the journey), I still found the overall experience less than I wanted. Again, I think that's a factor of expectations more than anything, but I wanted this to be a little more fun. I wanted the characters to feel a little more believable. I wanted the world a little bigger.</p></div><div><br /></div><div><p><b>44. Love Death and Robots, Volume III</b></p><p>I'm only ranking volume 3, but I actually just binged the entire series. For what it's worth, I'd have ranked the first two volumes a little higher, were they eligible. That's not to say I think Volume 3 is inherently worse, mind you, just not what I was looking for. At least not as consistently.</p><p>Even that's misleading. I find this series simultaneously amazing and frustrating. Visually, it's showcasing some absolutely gorgeous animation, some of which is on par with top-tier CG films. Likewise, the genre is right up my alley.</p><p>Where it all falls a little flat for me is the writing and execution. Or, more accurately, those are where it often falls flat: when this show delivers greatness, it <i>really</i> delivers. I'm just not sure anything in Volume 3 managed to juggle said greatness in a form I found appealing. The best episodes in my estimation were Jibaro and Bad Travelling. The first was a little too artsy for my taste, while the latter was grisly and disturbing to a degree I found unpleasant. These aren't flaws, mind you: another phrase for "too artsy" is "work of art," and Bad Travelling was trying to be unpleasant. These were both masterpieces; they just weren't what I was looking for.</p><p>The Very Pulse of the Machine was more along my interests. I liked several others, but that was probably my favorite of this bunch.</p><p>On another positive note, the episodes felt less obligated to include nudity for the sake of nudity (I can't help but suspect there was a mandate in Volume 1 - only a handful of installments excluded it). That's a huge plus: one of the show's strong suits is the availability of R-rated content, but the forced inclusion is a major weak point.</p><p>Overall, another strong collection in the best anthology series we've gotten in decades. Not quite what I was looking for, but I'd love to roll those dice again if they make a fourth volume.</p></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b>43. Oni: Thunder God's Tale</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Standard caveat that comes with dubbed media: I'm taking it on faith that the story I watched was actually the story they produced, because who the hell actually knows? This stop-motion miniseries is four episodes long, each around 40 minutes long. So basically a two-and-a-half hour movie told in chapters. The first two chapters are fine, if a little slow; the third chapter is easily the best of the bunch, featuring an effective (if predictable) twist and some extremely fun hijinks; and the conclusion is a bit generic. The conclusion is also why that caveat is so important: there's a lot of exposition at the end, and I can't help but think some of it's been mangled in translation. At least I hope that's the case: what makes the Netflix dub isn't awful, but it feels kind of simplistic.</div><div><br /></div><div>On top of that, the animation feels a tad antiquated compared to most modern stop-motion. This may have been a choice, but it's difficult to compare this to the animation in Wendell & Wild and not find it lacking.</div><div><br /></div><div>That said, the main character has a strong arc, and there's a great to enjoy here, including some delightful comedic sequences and a even a few good fights. It's a fun little series, but the ending left me slightly underwhelmed.</div></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>42. Wendell & Wild</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div>This is a movie where less would have been more. Essentially three movies packed together, Wendell & Wild juggles too many storylines and ideas to truly coalesce. I'm not exaggerating in my count: this has three distinct themes, each with its own arc and resolution. Had the movie found a way to resolve them all with a single climactic scene, it would have worked. Instead, it sort of wraps them up one-by-one, with a diminishing impact each time. Its divided focus also prevents them from developing key ideas and elements of the world.</div><div><br /></div><div>So the question here is why it's as high on this list as it is, and the answer is, for all the structural issues and narrative mishaps, it's still kind of rad as hell. No huge surprise here: this is a collaboration between Henry Selick and Jordan Peele. It's visually incredible, and - while there are far too many ideas for any to be fully developed - what we get are still evocative and fascinating. I also thought Kat's storyline and resolution were fantastic. The sequence where she faces her fears is particularly effective, both visually and conceptually.</div><div><br /></div><div>I really hate that the more grounded, socially meaningful elements were the ones that fell flat. I agree with the politics driving the movie's third main plot, but cutting the ideas and characters around them would have made for a better overall experience.</div><div><br /></div><div>Still, it's absolutely worth a watch. If you like stop-motion, there's a lot to love here. I just wish there wasn't also so much more.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART FOUR: THE GOOD STUFF</span></b></div><div><b><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></b></div><div><b>41. Rise of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Movie</b></div><div><br /></div><div>I watches this after seeing a few positive reactions online, and I did so having seen nothing in the series this is an extension of. Having grown up in the 80's, I'm of course familiar with the Turtles as a franchise, and I've seen various other incarnations over the years, but at this point I'm several iterations out of the loop. To put it another way, I watched this as a standalone movie.</div><div><br /></div><div>And... it's kind of great? I won't deny there were moments of confusion at the realization Leonardo's character is now closer to what I associate with Michelangelo. Likewise, the cyber/techno/mystic stuff powering their weapons caught me off guard (I'm sure it makes sense in context). But the emotional journey the Turtles went through over the course of the film was well constructed, the action sequences conveyed tension and excitement, and the reimagined Krang were scary. It was, simply put, <i>good</i>.</div><div><br /></div><div>That said, there was one weak link for me, and it was the comedy. I didn't think the jokes were bad, but on the whole I didn't find them particularly funny. But the action and drama more than made up the slack. Frankly, I think this is one of the better pieces of media in this franchise I've come across. Considering it's a direct to streaming movie spun off a cartoon series, that's kind of astonishing.</div><div><br /></div><p><b>40. Moon Knight, Season 1</b></p><p>Moon Knight was a bit of a roller coaster. The stuff was really good - great even - but too often the rest dragged. Whenever things got weird - truly and utterly so, I mean - I found myself pulled into the world. But then, almost without fail, the series would feel the need to slow down and explain. It wanted to deliver the bizarre surreal moments, but it didn't want to commit to them.</p><p>But there's really no denying the joy those moments - and in some cases episodes - conveyed. Moon Knight gave us some genuinely bizarre comic book fun, which is why it's as high on this list as it is.</p><p>It's not higher, because it couldn't (or perhaps wouldn't) sustain that energy.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>39. The Boys, Season 3</b></p><p>I'm honestly not sure where this belongs. Part of me thinks this show is among the best things on TV, while another part is getting tired of the way characters keep backsliding to justify additional seasons. Characters undergoing the same arcs - or at least variations of those arcs - from previous seasons is a pet peeve of mine when it comes to television, which is a problem, as it's damn near universal on this kind of show. Season 3 of The Boys is no exception, with Hughie and Butcher more or less repeating mistakes and relearning lessons. To be fair, I felt like we got some new material with several other characters (particularly Kimiko).</p><p>I think it's worth noting that by now The Boys has entirely crossed over from "superhero parody" to just "superhero," in terms of genre. It's still dark, satiric, and most of the powered characters are horrible people, but enough of the protagonists are powered to nullify the original premise of a world where superheroes don't exist. Annie and Kimiko are superheroes, and Maeve becomes one as she completes (?) her arc. This isn't a world where the hero/villain dynamic is inverted, but rather a world where the majority of superheroes are secretly villains and the true remaining heroes are trying to set things right. That's still a superhero world, albeit a dark one.</p><p>Well, darkish. The thing I've loved about The Boys from the start is that it's surprisingly idealistic, with far more heart than the premise and sick sense of humor imply. The series has always been a repudiation of toxic masculinity in all its forms, including several idolized by more mainstream entries in the genre. For all the exploding heads and one-liners, the show elevates healing, honesty, and compassion.</p><p>Well, most of the time. I think it falls flat in this respect around a few minor characters who remain one-note jokes and outlets for the audience's distain (looking at you, Deep). Thematically, having characters who are pathetic, ineffective, and beyond redemption undercuts the central idea of the series. It'll be interesting to see whether they take The Deep anywhere interesting in the future. If not, they probably should have killed him off midway through the first season.<br /></p><p>I also love the show's willingness to take moral and even political stances. The series is criticized by rightwing fascists upset they're being compared to fascists: I appreciate that this isn't sugarcoated or hidden. The bad guys don't talk like cartoonish exaggerations you'd find on old Saturday morning cartoons: they talk like Fox News commentators and police. Kudos to the showrunners for not taking the easy way out.</p><p>The main reason this isn't higher is the aforementioned redundancy in the main characters' arcs. There's also probably a ceiling on this, as some of the humor doesn't align perfectly with my preferences. It's hard to get offended watching anything this tongue-in-cheek, but there were times I got annoyed with the show's attempts to push things too far (though that the disclaimer on the Herogasm episode was hilarious).</p><p>I still enjoyed this a great deal, and I plan to continue watching. It remains a very good show, though I question how long they'll be able to keep it going before the premise runs out of gas.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>38. The Bad Guys</b></p><p>I'm almost inclined to bump this up a few more spots on the basis of the animation alone: it's a joy just to look at this thing. On top of that, there are some really good characters in this, and the central premise - a kid-friendly, Tarantino-esque crime thriller with the main characters played by iconic cartoon villains - is great.</p><p>The problem is they don't adhere quite as closely to that template as I'd like. I'm not talking about the redemption arc - this is a kid's movie, and I respect that comes with limitations. My issue is more with the shift in genre from heist caper to superhero flick. It's admittedly not an "objective" problem, but it undercuts a big part of what makes this really interesting.</p><p>What's closer to an objective issue is the movie's central conflict hinges on a very weak premise. The split between the film's two primary protagonists doesn't really work emotionally, so the movie fails to connect on that level.</p><p>I'll add that the movie's twists felt absurdly telegraphed, but - again - that's a "me" problem, not an objective issue in a movie intended for kids who've never seen a heist movie in their lives. That said, this is a "me" list.</p><p>It's an entertaining enough movie with great animation in the vein of The Peanuts Movie, Spider-Verse, and Mitchells Vs. The Machines: that counts for a lot. But as that list implies, stylized blends of 2D and 3D aren't unique anymore, so that only gets you so far. I had fun with this, but it's far from a great film.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>37. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, Season 1</b></p><p>This is 90% of the way there. The cast is fantastic, the concept of the show is phenomenal, the effects are great.... Like I said, 90%. The issue is structure: for whatever reason, this seems adamant about being more than an "episode of the week" series, and that's holding it back. I want to be clear, that issue doesn't prevent this from being a great show - it clears that bar with room to spare. But it's so close to nailing the Trek formula and taking its place among the best installments of the franchise, and it just doesn't quite get there.</p><p>I'm not sure this needs to be entirely episodic, but I'd prefer that to the approach we have. To be fair, it strikes the balance between episodic adventures and ongoing story far better than Discovery ever managed (at least through season 3 - I haven't seen the most recent season yet, which is why it's not on this list). But the ongoing story of Pike contending with the fate established in the Original Series episode The Menagerie and disclosed to him via time travel shenanigans in Discovery just isn't as interesting as the writers seem to believe. I thought the storyline around M'Benga's daughter had more potential, but damned if I wasn't let down by the episode resolving that (at least for the time being: I assume she'll be back in some capacity later).</p><p>The good stuff is the episodic stuff. I loved the pilot, the Gorn episode, and delightfully wacky episode where Spock and T'Pring swap bodies. I feel like these kinds of things are more in line with the show's premise: of getting back to the franchise's roots by visiting "strange new worlds" serving as catalysts for science-fiction stories about culture and society. And yet how many new worlds did they actually visit this season? I only remember two or three.</p><p>I'm hoping the next season will deliver more of that. I'm not adverse to character arcs and frame stories, particularly if they're good, but I felt like a lot of what was present here was mainly interested in assuring fans this was a modern show with an interconnected plot. In short, the meta-plot is here for the sake of delivering a meta-plot, rather than because there's a worthwhile story to tell. This is why I drifted away from Discovery and Doctor Who: here's hoping Strange New Worlds either embraces the episodic format or finds something more compelling to drive its season arcs.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>36. Star Wars: Tales of the Jedi, Season 1</b></p><p>I know conventional wisdom is that Star Wars has spent too much time focusing on Jedi, but the truth is I just absolutely love samurai space-wizards. In a lot of ways, this is closer to my ideal kind of Star Wars story: the only thing I'd like more is if they shifted the timeline ten thousand years one way or the other. Oh, and also if this were live-action. As technically impressive as the Lucasfilm house style animation is, it's started feeling a little bland to me, sort of like live-action lite.</p><p>But I love the simplicity of these stories and how effective the action is. The two duels we got (Ahsoka versus the Inquisitor and Dooku versus Yaddle) were fantastic. I'm also always grateful for Star Wars stories offering shades of grey to the typically black and white morality of the franchise, and we definitely got that while exploring the injustice and corruption at the heart of the Republic that inspired Dooku to turn on the Jedi. He chose wrong, but this offered sympathetic motivation for that choice, something Star Wars rarely provides.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>35. What We Do in the Shadows, Season 4</b></p><p>Has any show ever had more success mining drama from farce? What We Do in the Shadows manages an amazing feat, telling what's ultimately a gentle story of broken people struggling to form familial connections in what's objectively an utterly preposterous situation. Even setting aside the fact most of them are vampires, the characters aren't remotely realistic, and yet the show manages to sell their pain. It's a masterclass in empathy.</p><p>This season, largely centered around Nadja opening a nightclub and Lazlo raising the next incarnation of Colin Robinson, makes for a solid chapter in the series, but it does feel like a bit of a bridge. The season ends with a sizable cliffhanger which might upend the status quo (or not: last season ended on an even bigger cliffhanger, which kind of fizzled out between seasons). Assuming this does change the trajectory of the show, I think the fourth season will be mostly forgotten, not because it's bad but simply because it's a transition. And that's okay: there's nothing wrong with pacing these things out, especially if it makes for a stronger series overall.</p><p>But that does hold this back a bit when viewed on its own. I'm excited for what's (possibly) coming next, and I enjoyed these episodes well enough, but this is my least favorite season to date. To be fair, that's more a reflection of how phenomenal seasons 1 through 3 are: season 4 is still great TV.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>34. Night of the Coconut</b></p><p>Quite possibly the weirdest entry on this list, Night of the Coconut is a feature-length science-fiction/comedy film doubling as the season finale for Patrick Willem's ongoing series of YouTube video essays about movies. If you've seen any of those video essays, the concept of a fictional narrative continuation might make a little sense - Patrick has always approached his onscreen persona like a character - but the overall idea is still bonkers even before we get into the substance of the movie.</p><p>Fortunately, it's bonkers in a good way. A really good way, in fact: this thing is wildly inventive and extremely entertaining. That's not to say there aren't caveats, the most important being you really need to be familiar with Patrick's video essays to get a great deal of the jokes in this movie. The good news on that front is those video essays are absolutely wonderful, so if you're willing to put in the time, you're in for a real treat.</p><p>The other thing worth noting - and this probably goes without saying - is Night of the Coconut is made on a shoestring budget. They pull off some great shots in some impressive locations given what they spent, but you can still tell this doesn't have the resources of a major production. If you expect everything to look like it costs tens of millions of dollars, this might not impress you.</p><p>Honestly, though, it still might. This is a great deal of fun for fans of Willems's web series. I really enjoyed it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>33. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/04/movie-review-batman.html">The Batman</a></b></p><p>This is a gorgeous movie that finally gives us a great interpretation of both Batman and Gotham at the same time, something no previous live-action film has pulled off (exempting the Adam West movie). Throw in an operatic tone and great casting: this is basically my wish list for a Batman movie.</p><p>So why isn't this higher? There are several factors, but the largest is the writing. I don't think the script is bad, but it fails to establish and develop the relationships that would have taken this from a good movie to a great film.</p><p>Alternatively, if the action had felt truly inspired or original, I think this would have moved way up my list, even if the script was unchanged. As it is, this is still a welcome change of pace for the franchise. I really enjoyed it and can't wait for more. But as good as it was, it's a long way from my favorite piece of media for the year. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>32. Everything Everywhere All At Once</b></p><p>I know, I know - this deserves to be higher. But this list is dictated by my personal taste, not quality, and while I respect family drama, it doesn't appeal to me the way other genres do. That said, it's refreshing to see a movie actually address this subject matter from the perspective of an immigrant family, touching on real emotion in unreal situations. It explores its main character's relationships in ways that are funny and poignant at the same time: the lead character's relationship with her husband is beautiful, as are her troubled relationships with her father and daughter. This is a great movie - I just wish this genre connected with me more.</p><p><br /></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART FIVE: THE STUFF I LOVED</span></b></p><p><b>31. Ms. Marvel, Season 1</b></p><div>This is hard to rank, because it's a very uneven series. The first and last episode were among my favorite pieces of entertainment of the year. When this focused on Kamala, her friends, her family, and her community, it was Marvel at its best: quirky, funny, touching, and just delightful.</div><div><br /></div><div>It's the other stuff that holds it back, namely the complex lore, the elaborate mystery concerning alternate dimensions, and the storyline in which the entire world is at risk. Considering the fate-of-the-world stuff is resolved in the second to last episode, while the last pivots back to grounded threats and more relatable stakes, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the boring stuff was likely studio mandated.</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't want to imply the middle episodes were bad - they were still solid, with some great moments and characters. But if this had maintained the quality and fun of the first and last episodes throughout, it'd be in my top 10.</div><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>30. Archer, Season 13</b></p><p>What's there to say about Archer? It's almost certainly the funniest thing I watched this year and almost every other year it's been on the air. It's cleverly written, with characters you <i>should</i> hate but can't help but find yourself caring about despite their narcissism and lack of awareness. It balances the fun of heists and spies while being an over-the-top parody of those genres, and it's managed to do so for 13 seasons now. It's just great.</p><p>I don't really think this has many flaws in the conventional sense, but the reason I'm not placing this higher is the experience is fleeting. Despite some legitimately great writing around character arcs and emotional growth, what stays with you are the punchlines. That's by design, and it's the right choice for this series (as evidenced by the fact we're on season 13), but it does kind of place a ceiling on how high this can climb.</p><p>That ceiling was still supposed to be five or six spots lower, mind you - this fun enough to break through (insert "Danger Zone" joke here).</p><p><br /></p><p><b>29. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/the-guardians-of-galaxy-holiday-special.html">The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special</a></b></p><p>Wonderful in its simplicity, the Guardians Holiday special commits to being, quite simply, that: an hour-long Christmas special set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There are no galactic threats, supervillains, or really any serious danger. It's a short story about these characters interacting (in some cases badly) with the holidays. And it's simply wonderful.</p><p>A couple song choices felt uncharacteristically lazy to me (Gunn's usually so good at that), but as a whole he just knocks it out of the park. I enjoyed this a great deal, and the only reason it's not higher is this has been a really good year.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>28. Werewolf by Night</b></p><p>I fully acknowledge this is at an unfair advantage. When I set out to include TV on this list, I was thinking in terms of TV series, which are longer and paced slower than movies. Werewolf by Night is a special: at less than an hour total, it doesn't have to sustain its tone or energy as long. There are episodes of shows I've ranked below this that I absolutely enjoyed better than Werewolf by Night, but the series on average fell behind.</p><p>Is that fair? No. Does it matter? Also no. This is subjective, so if shorter sometimes works better, the ranking can reflect it. Also, there's no prize or anything, so who cares one way or the other?<br /></p><p>I do think this deserves some credit for pushing the envelope a bit. Disney+ is clearly experimenting with as many different permutations of episode length, number of installments, and tones as they can think of. After the Netflix Marvel shows wore out their welcome trying to copy the same old template, it's refreshing to see this kind of variety.</p><p>And this one's about as far outside of the box as they come, stylized after classic monster movies, with more violence and gore than I ever expected from the "family friendly" streamer. And on top of everything else, it's still loads of fun.</p><p>I'd love to see more from these characters and this side of Marvel Universe, but even more so I want to see more one-offs. I'd love an anthology showcasing obscure (or even not-so-obscure) Marvel characters teaming up and going on weird adventures.</p><p>Despite my general optimism about the MCU, the truth is a lot of their recent movies and shows - including ones I generally like - make me wish there was a little less. Yeah, I'm getting a little tired. But this one made me want more. That counts for a lot.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>27. Lost Ollie</b></p><p>There's a lot to appreciate about Lost Ollie, a Netflix miniseries about a lost toy trying to sift through his own fragmented memories and navigate a hostile world to return to the child he loves. I'll start with something that seems trivial but might be the show's secret weapon: its brevity. It's only four episodes long, each clocking in forty-five minutes, give or take, so we're really talking about a cumulative runtime on par with with a long movie. But unlike some streaming miniseries, this isn't just a movie carved into chunks: it actually bothers to use the format it's presented in to structure the story. The individual episodes really are chapters in the longer tale, permitting the show time to explore side characters and ideas that wouldn't work in a film.</p><p>That's not even touching on the tone, which goes to some dark places. The turns the story takes are never gratuitous - everything here is present for a reason - but it doesn't pull its punches, either. This thing's dark. When people point to movies like Secret of N.I.M.H. or Watership Down and say they don't make them like that anymore... well, turns out they do.</p><p>On a technical level, this is a marvel, as well. At least to my eye, the light values looked spot-on, to the point it was easy to forget several main characters were computer generated. This is nothing we haven't seen in movies, but it's rare to see a television show pull it off this flawlessly. </p><p>I struggled with just where I wanted to place this. Part of me wanted to push it even higher - I think there's a case to be made it's about as close to flawless as these things get. But there were a few minor pacing issues (particularly in the first episode) that held this back a bit. On top of that, while this might deserve to be loved more, it wasn't quite a perfect fit for my own genre preferences. Again, subjective placement; subjective list. But make no mistake: this is a fantastic fantasy drama. If you missed it last summer, it's absolutely worth checking out.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>26. Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio</b></p><p>My assumptions going into this were that it would be a relatively straightforward adaptation of Pinocchio that looked at felt like a Guillermo del Toro movie, and it turns out I drastically underestimated how much of del Toro would make it into the finished project. First, it's worth noting this borrows its overall structure from the Disney classic: the serial it's based on includes numerous stories, most of which aren't in the major adaptations. Like the Disney movie, this also keeps the cricket alive for Pinocchio's adventure, though it changes the character and sends him with Geppetto for the second half of the story. It's also worth noting that while most of the story beats are retained, everything is heavily transformed. Fairies become nightmarish spectral entities, the carnival is now a fascist training camp, most of the talking animals are fascists... there's a lot of fascism in this version.</p><p>Which brings me to one aspect that kind of held this back for me. One of the movie's central metaphors was a comparison between fairytale rules and fascist authoritarianism. The idea and execution are handled well here, but he did the exact same thing in Pan's Labyrinth. There's nothing wrong with that, mind you: there's no law that says you can't explore ideas and themes multiple times, but seeing the same trick made parts feel like a repeat and pulled me out of the movie.</p><p>That said, the ending of this pays off those themes even better than his earlier work. It also subverts expectations you have for this story and makes the movie extremely relevant to contemporary rights struggles and almost certainly applicable to future ones.</p><p>Oh, and as a side note I should probably mention this is one of the best looking animated movies of the year, and the "one of" qualifier is only necessary because this has been a fantastic year for animation. Definitely worth checking out if you haven't already done so.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>25. Thor: Love and Thunder</b></p><p>I know this was divisive, but I absolutely loved Love and Thunder. And, just for context, I'll mention I <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2017/11/movie-review-thor-ragnarok.html">wasn't a huge fan of Ragnarok</a>. Stylistically, I felt like Love and Thunder did a better job shuffling the various tones and ideas into a more compelling story. It's ultimately silly but also bittersweet and deeply sad in a way that feels thoughtful. I found the ending genuinely moving in a way only a few of these movies have managed to pull off.</p><p>I also really liked how this looked. Sequences truly felt as though they were set on different worlds or even different universes. Styles changes completely from scene to scene, giving each fight a decidedly unique feel. Some were silly, while others were breathtaking. The variety worked for me here. </p><p>Sure, if you want to go searching for plot holes, this movie has plenty to find. But plot holes are generally a side-effect of fast-paced storytelling. Dock them points if you like, but I'd rather shrug off how characters suddenly have access to teleportation or whatever than deal with a five minute explanation that leads nowhere.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>24. Our Flag Means Death, Season 1</b></p><p>A large aspect of what makes this show work as well as it does comes from the decision to conceal critical aspects of both its genre and its premise in ads. I have no idea whether this was done as an intricate strategy or if HBO Max lacked faith a romantic comedy centered around gay pirates would attract viewers and subscriptions. Whatever the rationale, it made the experience of discovering the show all the more delightful.</p><p>Throw in an extremely impressive cast that includes a number of top-tier comedic actors, and you've got something special. So special, in fact, I was tempted to bump it higher on this list.</p><p>Obviously, there's "but" coming.</p><p>The area the show comes up short is in the season finale. I understand the temptation to end these on cliffhangers, but I think it's a mistake here. Honestly, I think it might generally be a mistake to end almost any modern streaming serialized show without at least some sense of closure. The story doesn't need to be "over," but I feel like it should feel more like the end of an arc than the beginning, particularly since there's no guarantee the next arc will ever materialize.</p><p>It's not the biggest issue in the world, but it does factor into my overall impression of the show, and I sincerely doubt I'm alone here. Regardless, the season was still funny and touching, even if the last few minutes were a tad frustrating.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>23. Peacemaker, Season 1</b></p><p>I hope to God this is the future of television.</p><p>Not necessarily the R-rating (though it certainly worked here), but the simple fact the series was in the hands of a talented filmmaker who was given the resources and time to make something exceptional. I feel like we were conditioned for decades to accept the TV quality could never be in the same ballpark as a movie. And it turns out that isn't true.</p><p>The series is funny, touching, and exciting, with fantastic fight scenes and great character moments. Every performance is great - I honestly don't feel like I can pick standouts, because no one comes up short.</p><p>The closest I can come to a complaint is that I felt like the last episode bit off a little more than it could chew, and the big fight felt a little small. It was a rare moment when this reminded me it was being made in a TV budget and schedule. But even that was more than mitigated by focusing on character rather than spectacle. And also because the "cow" looked like something you'd see in a Guardians of the Galaxy movie.</p><p>This show delivered and proved superhero television doesn't need to feel like a cheep knockoff of the movies.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>22. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/11/movie-review-weird-al-yankovic-story.html">Weird: The Al Yankovic Story</a></b></p><p>The main joke in Weird, of course, is that it plays out like an actual biopic (at least for the most part). There are plenty of silly side-jokes and absurd moments, but Radcliffe plays Yankovic as a tormented artist, rather than a cartoonish joke. It essentially shifts the punchline from individual scenes to the film as a whole. It's all silly, of course, but it's surprisingly intelligent at the same, asking the audience to consider how its relationship with reality mirrors that of the genre its parodying.</p><p>I had a lot of fun with this one. Granted, I've got a soft spot for Yankovic. I'm part of the generation that grew up listening to his music as it was released, so this is all nostalgia for me (despite being entirely fictitious). I can't imagine this plays well to people who aren't fans, but for those who are... it's absolutely wonderful.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>21. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/11/station-eleven-20212022.html">Station Eleven</a></b></p><p>Most of Station Eleven aired in 2021, but the last few episodes landed early in 2022, so this qualifies for the list.</p><p>To be honest, I'm still working through my feelings towards this. On one hand, it was somewhat frustrating in its refusal to commit to a subgenre and tone. On the other... I'm pretty sure that was intentional. It outright refused to give us the ending we expected, as if mocking us for believing humans could ultimately be as simple and one-dimensional as cliché heroes and villains who resolve their differences through acts of violence. And if we consider a nonviolent resolution unsatisfying, what's that say about us?</p><p>Or me. I'm not certain. I'm not even certain I consider the ending unsatisfying, so much as surprising. And while I was watching, I remember feeling fascinated and entertained. There's a whimsy to Station Eleven that's admirable.</p><p>But at times it overstays its welcome. It feels like the show is trying to be too clever in its fixation on theme over plot. I found the experience enjoyable enough, but I was left wanting a bit more than I got. </p><p>That said, the longer I sit with this, the higher my opinion creeps. I'm adding this paragraph right before publishing, as it jumps another four or five spaces, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if I look back on this and wonder why it isn't higher still. This is a series that sticks with you.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>20. Everything Everywhere All At Once</b></p><div>It's exciting to see comedy making a comeback. The genre's been more or less dead for ages, but Everything Everywhere All At Once brings it back, front and center. And make no mistake, this film is hilarious, thanks to one of the funniest scripts in ages, an absolutely phenomenal cast, and editing that puts virtually every other film released this year to shame. This film is woven together with an eye towards comic timing that's incredible to behold.</div><div><br /></div><div>And the raccoon gag alone... I mean, I'm speechless. </div><div><br /></div><div>I'm truly in awe of what they accomplished here. But as much as I love comedy, it's not quite my favorite genre, which is why I can't rank this any higher.</div><p><br /></p><p><b>19. The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent</b></p><p>The majority of these don't work. I'm referring of course to the micro-genre of comedies where the lead character is an actor playing a fictionalized, exaggerated version of themself, in the vein of Being John Malkovich (possibly one of all my all-time top 10 favorite movies, depending on the time of day and weather). Maybe Malkovich set the bar too high: movies like Cold Souls and The Congress tried recreating the dark tone and cerebral premise, and it never seems to work (at least not for me).</p><p>But I wasn't reminded of any of those while watching The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (aside from one absolutely phenomenal deleted sequence that is a little like the inner-worldly chase sequence in the third act of Malkovich). If anything, the movie feels more like Galaxy Quest, of all things. The genre is different, obviously, as this is a comedic homage to Cage's career, as opposed to sci-fi, but the relationship between the fictional Cage and his real-life counterpart is closer to that between Jason Nesmith and William Shatner than any of the movies mentioned above. His arc is certainly closer.</p><p>Which is a way of saying Cage isn't just a punchline of point or point-of-view here: he's the protagonist. And the movie's runtime isn't solely devoted to ironically making fun of its own concept (though there's plenty of that). Story, character, and relationships are the driving forces here - the fact Cage is playing himself (as well as several characters from his past) is just facilitating those elements. To put it another way, this same movie could have been made with Cage playing an actor with a fictional name, the references could have been tweaked, and the movie would have been just as good and just as effective (though maybe not quite as much fun).</p><p>Because - with apologies for buying the lead here - The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is an absolute blast. Even if you're not familiar enough with Cage's filmography to catch all the references (I'm sure I missed a bunch), this works as a straightforward buddy comedy. Pascal and Cage are wonderful here: it's genuinely delightful seeing them bond on screen. And that's setting aside this movie's value as a celebration of Cage's career, as well as the film's meditations on the Hollywood machine. Is it borrowing from Adaptation in that respect? A bit, though - for my money, at least - I think Unbearable offers a more satisfying exploration of that idea by not sacrificing the surface level story in service of conceptual themes (I still love you, Adaptation).</p><p>The short of all that is this one may be clever, but most movies doing this sort of thing are clever. What sets this apart is it manages to be a fun, light-hearted comedy at the same time. Definitely worth seeing if you haven't already. And once you're done watching, check out the deleted scenes, because the one I mentioned above is awesome.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>18. Obi-Wan Kenobi</b></p><p>Endings count for a lot. I think that's something people making movies understand, while those making TV shows... not so much. To be fair, television show endings didn't used to be quite as important, largely because for the bulk of their existence, the goal was to never end. But that's changed with the advent of streaming, where the structural lines between movies and shows have become blurred. I think some of the studios have been quicker to figure this out. Disney has been frustratingly slow. Possibly setting aside the first season of The Mandalorian, every live action Marvel and Star Wars season before Kenobi kind of fell flat in the last episode. That's not to say all the last episodes have been bad, but they've consistently been among the least satisfying of their respective seasons, and as a result you're left feeling let down. Underwhelmed. Disappointed.</p><p>The finale of Obi-Wan Kenobi is the opposite. It wraps up its main arcs in ways that make the preceding series, the Star Wars prequel trilogy, and - hell - even the original films better in retrospect. It delivers some emotional punches you feel.</p><p>Sure, I could nitpick a few choices that bugged me (the Qui-Gon thing felt extraneous), but overall this is damn near the best version of this we could have hoped for. I enjoyed this throughout, and the ending gave it the resonance needed to make it feel like something bigger than just another generic franchise installment.</p><p><br /></p><div><p><b>17. Everything Everywhere All At Once</b></p></div><div>How often does a low-budget science-fiction film appear and outshine everything the big studios are doing? I'm not just talking about the ideas or dialogue: this is visually more interesting than movies with budgets ten times as high. It's incredible to behold, and yet it never allows what you're seeing to overshadowing what you're thinking about or feeling. The effects weave into the story, the characters, and the ideas. This is what science-fiction should be. I loved it.</div><div><br /></div><p><b>16. Andor, Season 1</b></p><p>Periodic reminder this list is based on preference, not quality, which is the one and only reason this isn't significantly higher. Andor was, by any metric I can imagine, phenomenal. It's the most mature, thoughtful incarnation of Star Wars we've gotten ever. It's great storytelling, and there damn well better be more on the way.</p><p>But here's the thing: part of its brilliance is tied in the decision to drop the space wizards with laser swords, dial back the silly aliens, and deliver a show with a serious tone. I like gritty, realistic science-fiction, but what I love is space fantasy. Hell, I almost put Obi-Wan ahead of this for that reason, despite this being a far superior show. But, I mean, this was so much better (and Obi-Wan was already good).</p><p>This is the sort of quality television creators should reach for. I'll watch as many seasons of Andor as they're willing to give me and be grateful. But if they ever give me a live-action fantasy about Jedi this good, you might just see a TV show take the top spot.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>15. The Banshees of Inisherin</b></p><p>It's almost too tempting to focus on the aspects of Martin McDonagh's movies that carry over from his background as a playwright - his grasp of character is incredible, and I'm not sure anyone working in film can match his dialogue - but while watching The Banshees of Inisherin I found myself equally drawn to the subtlety of facial expressions, the movements of animals, and the evocative landscapes. There are plenty of classical Hollywood productions that really feel like plays on film, including some absolute masterpieces. But McDonagh isn't just doing that: he's taking the best aspects of stage plays and combining those with everything movies bring to the table.</p><p>I should note I've yet to see a film from McDonagh I didn't love (I know Seven Psychopaths is widely regarded as a misstep, but I found it delightful). Banshees of Inisherin is no exception. In Bruges remains my favorite of his movies (it appeals to my sensibilities), though part of me thinks Inisherin is probably the better work. Given how good In Bruges already was, that's saying a great deal.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>14. Russian Doll, Season 2</b></p><p>It must be hard making a sequel season for something like Russian Doll. While everything about the first season was phenomenal by any measure, it was also one of those pieces of media you watch and wonder where the hell it came from. A lot of the appeal was how fresh and unexpected it felt, a smart genre show that seemed uninterested in the usual conventions. It took old tropes in new directions, which transformed something already great into a work of art that felt revolutionary.</p><p>But that's a double-edged sword, because the very nature of a sequel requires it to retread its own steps. It literally can't be as fresh a second time. But it turns out it can still be great. And, more impressively, it proves you can make a logical follow-up that doesn't feel like a rehash. The second season retains its leads and the broader genre elements, but it takes them in very different directions. The decision to stick with time travel but abandon the Groundhog Day-style loop was a good one: it gave the writers room to explore while still feeling like a continuation.</p><p>If the season has a flaw, it's the same as the one in the first season: the ending sacrifices logic for emotional impression. And if you're thinking that hardly sounds like a flaw at all, well... I'm right there with you (this paragraph starts with the word, "if" for a reason). It's difficult to do something new with time travel (<a href="https://www.erinlsnyder.com/p/books.html">believe me, I know</a>), and I admire them for leaning more towards fairytale than traditional science-fiction. But this list isn't ranked by admiration, and I found myself feeling the tiniest bit let down by the ending.</p><p>To be clear, this is a reaction, not a criticism. I think this was absolutely the right choice for the show. Hell, I'm not even able to offer some sort of "here's the ending I wanted" blueprint. I'm not sure what would have completely satisfied me. Maybe nothing could have.</p><p>And all this is just a longwinded explanation for why one of the best acted, best written genre shows ever made is only near the top of my list for the year. I still loved this thing.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>13. Prey</b></p><p>Back in the '90s, Dark Horse Comics produced a ton of comics based on popular movie franchises. The three most prolific - or at least the three I recall seeing most often - were Alien, Star Wars, and Predator. I actually read more from the first two properties, but my understanding is the quality and approach were largely consistent. While there were certainly arcs that attempted to build out lore or threaten the galaxy or whatever, the best were contained adventures that set out to tell a contained, intelligent story using elements from the source material.</p><p>Thus felt like the cinematic version of one of those, and it was incredibly refreshing. We didn't learn about the Predator's religion or political faction or any of the other nonsense that dragged down the last installment. And the Predator wasn't threatening the world the main character inhabited (how could it - we know her world is already doomed). It's ultimately a story about a woman setting out to prove herself a warrior and coming face to face with a monster. Also, there's a Predator.</p><p>I love the simplicity. I also love that the Comanche are depicted realistically, while the white traders are essentially two-dimensional savages incapable of introspection or reason, flipping the dynamic from traditional westerns.</p><p>Likewise, the action is fantastic, the design for the new Predator is a series best, and the cast is phenomenal. Do I wish the CG was a little better? Sure. The CG animals look rushed to me: a little more time and money would almost certainly have fixed that. But it's a trivial matter in a great movie.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>12. Glass Onion</b></p><p>All right. This one's new, so *spoilers* or whatever.</p><p>I feel like Rian Johnson is playing a game with us. Knives Out subverted our expectations around who the main character would be and whether the story being told was a mystery or suspense. We all knew Glass Onion might do the same thing. Or not. Maybe it would just be a conventional murder mystery.</p><p>And clearly Rian Johnson knew that we knew. So he dangled the possibility we were watching a straightforward mystery this time in front of us. Then, when he pulled that back around the halfway point, he dared us to start second-guessing him. And I briefly got the better of him! I figured out, well... I don't want to say what I figured out in case someone ignored the spoiler warning, but I picked up on something important.</p><p>But maybe Rian wanted me to, because there were a bunch of twists waiting in the wings, and by the time I realized I was watching a stealth revenge flick concealed within layers of murder mysteries, I wasn't sure how he he'd pulled off that slight-of-hand. I'm still not.</p><p>These movies are kind of zany. They're absurd and surprisingly upbeat, and the politics behind them somehow make them delightful instead of depressing.</p><p>I can't wait to watch whatever Johnson's got planned for the third installment of this franchise.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>11. Derry Girls, Season 3</b></p><p>I'm including the series finale, "The Agreement," here, despite it being ambiguously a separate special that aired directly after the season as a cap to the show in its entirety. And here's the thing: if I weren't including it, this would jump up a few spaces.</p><p>The Agreement isn't at all bad: quite the contrary, when taken on its own merits. I'm sure it's even better if you lived in Ireland in 1998. But as a fan of the show, it left me feeling cheated in the exact same way I felt a bit let down after watching the Firefly sequel, Serenity. Both featured time jumps and felt like conclusions to seasons we hadn't gotten, rather than what had actually been shown to us. Characters had developed in the intervening time and seemingly undergone significant arcs.</p><p>The finale showed us the characters had grown into intelligent adults, ready to think about politics and the world through a mature lens. They still retained their impetuous energy, propensity for mischief, and self-centered inclinations, but they'd grown beyond the inability to think beyond that. I'd have liked to see that happen rather than skipping right to the result.</p><p>I'd also have liked some resolution to the arcs started in this season. Erin and James's relationship and Michelle's insecurity around it were dropped entirely. The episode before the finale seemingly sets up multiple storylines for Clare, but these evaporate in the time-jump and she's reduced to a minor character in the finale.</p><p>I was invested in all that. The series pulled off a remarkable feat in setting up shallow, self-centered leads then, without sacrificing that premise, making them sympathetic by building out their relationships in ways they themselves don't understand. It's also one of the funniest shows I've seen in years, and this season contains one of the best episodes in the series (see my list of favorite episodes below). I loved it.</p><p>I just wish we'd gotten a fourth season between the penultimate episode and The Agreement. There was a lot left to do and a lot more worth setting up.</p><p><br /></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;">PART SIX: THE TOP TEN</span></b></p><p><b>10. The House</b></p><p>This stop motion anthology is weird, quirky, and legitimately creepy. All three stories were fantastic, though I do think it would have benefited from a either tying them together or having the second and third feel a bit more distinct. That's splitting hairs, though - I loved this thing, start to finish. If Netflix wants to keep paying for tonally dark animated pieces that actually feel artistic, I'm more than happy to keep watching.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>9. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2022/12/spirited-2022.html">Spirited</a></b></p><p>It's tragic that the business end of the musical genre seems to crashing and burning at the same time there's an artistic Renaissance in the genre. Last year there was In the Heights and West Side Story, both amazing films, and both box office failures. I'm not sure if Spirited was sent direct-to-streaming (no, I don't count limited runs) as a result, but it sure feels like it. And it also feels absurd. This was fantastic: if I were at a place in my life where going to theaters was practical, this is the kind of movie I'd want to see. Big, bombastic, fun... it would have been been amazing on the big screen.</p><p>On the small screen, however... actually, it's still pretty damn amazing. The songs are great, the jokes land, the cast is phenomenal... this is great.</p><p>Of course, I'm also watching this as a Christmas junkie. And, even more specifically, a Christmas Carol one this year. This was approximately the <i>fiftieth</i> adaptation (or quasi-adaptation) I watched in 2022, so when I say it's the most fun I've seen, that means something. "Most fun" isn't the same as best, mind you (that's still the 1935), but this pulls off comedy, spectacle, and character at the same time. A lot of recent versions have attempted that trifecta, none have come close. Spirited, on the other hand, makes it look easy. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>8. The Princess</b></p><p>I've seen people complain The Princess doesn't have enough of a story - personally, I think it's got too much. This movie would seriously have had a shot at the top of the list if it weren't for the dull backstory and the resolution in which she [checks notes] wins the approval of the patriarchy (for fuck's sake, Hollywood, hire an actual feminist to proof your feminist action movie scripts, and this wouldn't happen). And, yes, I know without the backstory you'd have legions of men lining up to prove they don't know what the phrase "Mary Sue" actually means, but fuck 'em. The Princess is a ridiculous power fantasy, and pausing the fun to assure us the protagonist was adequately trained to explain her abilities doesn't help anyone.</p><p>But when the movie gets into its rhythm, the volume's cranked up to the eleventh century. It's a comically absurd and immensely satisfying experience. The iconography of seeing a storybook princess turn into a gruff, pissed-off scrapper in the vein of Wolverine is delightful. The script to The Princess may be idiotic, but the premise - and more important the way that premise is communicated visually - is nothing short of brilliant. Women almost never get to play this kind of fighter. In the rare case when they're cast as action leads, they're almost always presented as elegant and graceful, so seeing an actress turning pain into anger and relishing brutality - all while ostensibly in the role of the literal archetype for feminine refinement - carries a great deal of meaning (again, assuming you can look past the script).</p><p>Also, this is likely a better Dungeons & Dragons movie than the upcoming Dungeons & Dragons movie will be. Just saying.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>7. Only Murders in the Building, Season 2</b></p><p>There's something hauntingly effective about this show. Tonally, it whips back and forth between farce and existential drama, but it does so without ever feeling jarring or forced. It's kind of miraculous to watch: I almost wish I was less invested, so I could study the technique.</p><p>With one key exception, I liked season two even more than season one, and that's saying something: I absolutely loved season one. That exception, sadly, is the story's culmination. While still great, the actual resolution wasn't shocking or emotionally impactful this time. To be clear, I'm not saying it has to be: they went for something sillier in the finale, and peppered their emotional gut punches throughout instead. Nothing inherently wrong with leaving the audience smiling, but it's the only reason this is *near* the top of this list, rather than *at* the top.</p><p>I'm of course really looking forward to season three. The series remains among my favorite shows in the middle of what may be the best era in the medium's history. Just a phenomenal blend of comedy, mystery, and drama.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>6. She-Hulk: Attorney at Law, Season 1</b></p><p>On one level, this should have been a 26 episode season. To really pull off the effect they were going for, we needed more courtroom-centered episodes, more time with Jen's character arc, and more of whatever else they wanted to pour into this.</p><p>But of course that would have been impossible. This must have been absurdly expensive to produce as it was, to say nothing of the time required to prep, stage, and shoot a series where the main character is nine feet tall and green. Frankly, it's incredible this got made at all. And another miracle it was great.</p><p>And it was absolutely great. It captured aspects of the comics better than I could have hoped. Not just She-Hulk comics, either - though it was more or less a perfect encapsulation of those - this brought in tones and ideas that have until now been absent from the MCU. This establishes a world where the spectacular and absurd really is becoming mundane. That's funny, but it's also a basis for kinds of stories they haven't been able to tell up until now. We've never really seen street-level villains like Man-Bull before. For everything Marvel's done right, the MCU has tended to err on the side of realism. But this changes that, and it is incredibly refreshing.</p><p>And that's not even touching on the ending. Or Madisynn, for that matter. Start to finish, this show was delightful. I want more.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>5. RRR</b></p><p>I really need to see more Indian movies. RRR was just incredible to behold, a gorgeous unironic period action movie unfettered by realism or other limitations holding American productions back. The fight sequences were inventive, funny, and exhilarating on a level that puts our film industry to shame. Same goes for the musical numbers: I absolutely loved this.</p><p>In fact, I loved it so much, the main thing I feel I need to explain is why this isn't in the top spot. Because part of me thinks it should be.</p><p>What holds it back is the turn its politics seemed to take in the last few minutes of the film. I say "seemed to take" because I want to acknowledge this is all based on my reading. I've done a little research to confirm I'm not entirely off-base on what I'm about to say, but I don't want anyone to think I'm claiming to be an expert on Indian culture, history, or politics.</p><p>After rightly focusing on the evils of imperialism and colonialism, the movie took a turn towards nationalism. That's not entirely unexpected, given the history being referenced, but the extent and tone of that shift left me uncomfortable. The line between national pride and extreme right-wing nationalism (or even fascism) is blurry.</p><p>Without doing far more research than I have time to get involved in, I can't really discuss whether this was justified in context, nor can I weigh in on other cultural controversies the movie is being criticized for. However, from a subjective point-of-view, I can say elements, particularly in the closing musical number, tempered an otherwise universally positive reaction.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>4. The Northman</b></p><p>Deconstructed revenge flicks aren't a new concept, but as a rule of thumb there's a price. By their nature, if you're challenging the genre itself, you're sacrificing the visceral thrill these movies offer. You can't very well create a movie critical of the genre that maintains the same levels of energy and excitement.</p><p>Only... The Northman <b>does</b>. By creating a truly immersive experience, it pulls you into the world and worldview of the main character. You're treated to an experience reminiscent of Conan: The Barbarian in all its glory. It's thrilling and engaging and wonderful.</p><p>But not stupid. The movie understands how toxic that worldview is, and it's not shy about explaining that. The hero isn't a hero, his quest is clearly not righteous, and the things he does in the name of that quest are objectively awful.</p><p>You're pulled in two different directions throughout the movie, and by rights one should give, yet neither ever does. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>3. Wednesday, Season 1</b></p><p>This almost took the top spot. At the end of episode 7, I really thought it was going to. Because I love this show. I just absolutely, completely love it. Until the last episode, that is.</p><p>The season finale isn't even bad. It's grandiose, with great effects, solid fights, and some wonderful moments. But it's also... well... it's all very generic fantasy adventure. Because, once again, we're let down by the writers or producers scared they won't be taken seriously if the lead lacks an arc. If she doesn't display weakness. If she doesn't grow and change as a person.</p><p>I know, I know. Conventional wisdom holds the best stories adhere to this formula. And to a degree, that's generally been true for much of cinema and television. But the sheer volume of shows - genre shows, in particular - conforming to this template has rendered the Hero's Journey trite. And, while I could see them setting up Wednesday's transformation throughout, I also saw them pushing back on convention.</p><p>For the majority of the show, Wednesday was the anthesis of the standard heroine. While she never came close to fulfilling the <b>actual</b> definition of a "Mary Sue," she seemed to defiantly embody the now common use of the term... and it was glorious. Every time she unveiled a new skill and seemed invincible was a delight. For seven episodes, she was fearless, and I've never been happier. It was an unapologetic power fantasy, and I rejoiced in it.</p><p>Then, at the very end, it offered a bit of an apology. She showed fear. Her enemies drew blood. She made obvious mistakes and took them to heart. Then it all concluded in a big, typical fight against the bad guy. A parody of Harry Potter turned into Harry Potter for the final act. And it was still solid, particularly for television.</p><p>But until that moment, it was so much more. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>2. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/03/movie-review-turning-red.html">Turning Red</a></b></p><p>This is my favorite Pixar movie since at least Toy Story 4, and even then it's close. More importantly, Turning Red represents the sort of original, out-of-the-box creative thinking the studio was in danger of replacing with house-styles and script formulas. You can still see Pixar's fingerprints on this, but it feels new and exciting in a way Pixar movies haven't in a while.</p><p>It's also just really damn good. The situation is funny, the characters are relatable, and the world is gorgeous to look at. And, of course, the kaiju in the third act is just delightful. I'm not certain what Domee Shi does next, but I can't wait to find out.</p><div><br /></div><div><div><p><b>1. Everything Everywhere All At Once</b></p></div></div><div>I don't usually rate martial arts films this high, but... damn. DAMN. This thing is incredible. The imagination alone in the fights rivals the best sequences in action. Every fight is incredible to behold, and yet each is unique and fascinating. During one sequence, I was reminded of the bar stool fight in World's End. Others made me think of Kung Fu Hustle. And still others were borderline indescribable. And yet every one serves the story and characters, a feat which... huh. I suddenly had a sense of deja vu. Weird.</div><div><br /></div><div>At any rate, this action film was really special. The fights were memorable and engrossing. They were funny without sacrificing excitement. I have no idea what the legacy of Everything Everywhere At Once will be, if this will be a turning point that future movies emulate or if it'll be a unique movie held up as the only example of its kind. Regardless, watching was an absolutely incredible experience. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div><p><b>Closing Thoughts</b></p></div><div>With apologies to anyone confused, I won't be using this space to explain why this list is three items longer than it technically should be. I will, however, offer some thoughts on the process of making this list and why I think the exercise has at least a little value.</div><div><br /></div><div>Ranking pieces of entertainment - or really any art - is always awkward, regardless of how the list is framed. If you're trying to quantify quality, you're going to run into issues around whether the ideal should be perfection or difficulty, because these are opposing forces. The simpler the goal, the easier it is to approach flawlessness, so you're always going to find yourself balancing the two. I'm of course ranking based on preference, but even within a subjective context this isn't always clear. Am I prioritizing my enjoyment, the degree to which I was emotionally invested, or my intellectual engagement? Am I focusing on my reaction to the most impactful <i>moments</i> of a piece of media, some sort of average of the whole, or am I conversely focusing on the low points and favoring shows or movies that have the fewest? These questions are difficult enough to navigate when looking solely at films, but tossing television shows into the mix makes it all the more complicated.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>I hope I'm not disappointing anyone by admitting I don't have simple answers to any of those questions. There's no universal rubric I used, but I spent a great deal of time considering these shows and movies from the various perspectives suggested by these approaches. And to me that's a big part of the value of going through all this: it forces me to consider the media I'm consuming from different angles.</div><div><br /></div><div>For anyone reading (is anyone still reading this?) I assume the value of this article more boils down to seeing how your favorites fared on my list (and presumably other lists as well), and maybe using it to find movies and TV shows you might have missed. That's certainly why I look at various critics' lists every year.</div><div><br /></div><div>If anyone made it to the end of all that, I hope you found a few to add to your list, or at the very least found the experience amusing in some way.</div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-37513505795668856492022-11-05T20:02:00.000-07:002022-11-05T20:02:02.018-07:00Movie Review: Weird: The Al Yankovic Story<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL9gkK57caoCvy136GhXuEZ-bQeNKxo0CUtZVv-mGGlVNtQGCqLKm97vLcB4p9Z0qKCsvGvwkfGzGX4ZNYPoP_omZ8dJ7L7fFD44AeiitPtSJSFJjqaFN_Bt6YordlVRVxZ6HeBn-AX_WujAMZVqFUjeQ1tjeAX_Gl8hrru3E1U7T4xTnN9q8J9snUUA/s2588/IMG_20160626_193207991.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2588" data-original-width="2432" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL9gkK57caoCvy136GhXuEZ-bQeNKxo0CUtZVv-mGGlVNtQGCqLKm97vLcB4p9Z0qKCsvGvwkfGzGX4ZNYPoP_omZ8dJ7L7fFD44AeiitPtSJSFJjqaFN_Bt6YordlVRVxZ6HeBn-AX_WujAMZVqFUjeQ1tjeAX_Gl8hrru3E1U7T4xTnN9q8J9snUUA/s320/IMG_20160626_193207991.jpg" width="301" /></a></div><p>Weird is destined to be measured against Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, and it's hard to deny both films tread similar ground. Both are parodies of music biopics, and both mimic the conventions of the genre and amplify the absurdity. And that's not even touching on the spoilery aspects. But the films differ in at least one key aspect: Walk Hard is centered around its jokes, to the point the movie feels more like a series of loosely connected skits than a unified narrative. Weird goes in the opposite direction, occasionally sacrificing laughs in favor of the whole.</p><p>Arguably the funniest aspect of Weird is that it's better <b>as a biopic</b> than some of the movies it's parodying, at least in terms of story construction and narrative cohesion. Throw in a genuinely great performance from Daniel Radcliffe, and you've got what amounts to a perfect facsimile of a "real film" in the genre, at least for the first two acts. This isn't a slapdash parody from the '80s or '90s where the movie spends its runtime winking at the audience: it knows we're in on the joke, so it's free to inhabit the genre it's spoofing. That's of course a much more difficult feat to pull off, as it requires real filmmaking chops, but Eric Appel pulls it off.</p><p>None of that actually provides emotional catharsis, of course, because it's impossible to take the premise seriously. But that's kind of the point: as a genre, music biopics are notorious for bending the truth and exaggerating their subjects' histories and personalities for dramatic effect. By replicating the process as well or better than those movies, Weird highlights the artificiality of the genre spectacularly. We're seeing something nearly stylistically identical to a traditional biopic where the content is replaced with ridiculous antics. In short, a perfect encapsulation of how Weird Al's music works translated to film.</p><p>Again, that's true for the first two acts. I don't begrudge the filmmakers for wanting to have some fun with the ending, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy seeing the movie shift gears and turn briefly into an homage to the Rambo sequence from UHF. It's also worth noting Weird never stops being a coherent film, with throughlines, callbacks, and payoffs. What it does do is drop the adherence to the illusion this is a "real biopic," and I'd have preferred they stuck with that premise. But's that a matter of preference.</p><p>It's hard to overstate how important Radcliffe is to the film. He sells his character's manic state and emotional instability, even in objectively ludicrous situations. He plays Al as a struggling, tormented artist, and he does so fantastically. He could deliver a virtually identical performance in a different movie, and it would come off as genuinely dramatic. A great deal of the movie's humor rests on this juxtaposition: he deserves a lot of credit for making this work.</p><p>One area the movie does deviate from most modern biopics (and one where it arguably falls a little flat) is in the singing. The songs are sung by Weird Al, rather than having Radcliffe mimic him, and the movie either doesn't try or doesn't succeed in selling the lip-synching. To be fair, this might have been intentional, as well. Either way, it certainly doesn't hurt this as a parody, but it's one aspect where it stops looking like a "real biopic." </p><p>Even though the ultimate punchline is the movie itself, the individual jokes, while slightly more restrained than you might expect, deliver plenty of laughs, and there's a seemingly endless line of cameos lined up. I was a little surprised not to see more musicians show up in bit parts, though - it's mainly comedians filling out the cast.</p><p>It should go without saying, but a lot of the appeal here is going to center on how important Weird Al's music is to you. If you're not a fan, this probably isn't going to change that. But if you grew up listening to his music, I think you'll have a great time. I certainly did.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-91572309102504772532022-05-21T20:31:00.001-07:002022-05-21T20:31:49.153-07:00Movie Review: Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoKz6q82lUnlyEdBkYluR6WPqWLSHPV8H8aHjQnJj500PY7kPyNSIlI6pAhVa47im0Cn8RvEZfBA3SCtflJ21VcrUtRl0IylIysk_mgGmgSAcwgCGhUux2Ha0LyduoX4ochIkKCcTwHV0W9PQNJfNZHw9qr_WlXn1ZLVnn0BkApWr8O68U4BZRww5ULg/s4016/PXL_20220521_142953164.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2241" data-original-width="4016" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoKz6q82lUnlyEdBkYluR6WPqWLSHPV8H8aHjQnJj500PY7kPyNSIlI6pAhVa47im0Cn8RvEZfBA3SCtflJ21VcrUtRl0IylIysk_mgGmgSAcwgCGhUux2Ha0LyduoX4ochIkKCcTwHV0W9PQNJfNZHw9qr_WlXn1ZLVnn0BkApWr8O68U4BZRww5ULg/s320/PXL_20220521_142953164.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>Well, this is inexplicably better than it has any right to be. It's not <i>great</i> or anything, but for what's ultimately a comedy about talking CG cartoons, it's pretty solid. This appears to be set in the same world as "Who Framed Roger Rabbit". This isn't outright stated, but it's heavily implied, and not just because Roger gets a cameo and you can spot a vial of dip in one scene. This is a world where cartoons live and work alongside flesh-and-blood humans. Only it's not the 1940s anymore: it's present day.</p><p>A cynical way of viewing this would be to dismiss it as a barrage of Easter eggs, and that wouldn't be unfair. The humor is largely built around endless strings of references and gags, many of which don't carry any significance beyond a moment's recognition. But then the movie is largely about nostalgia and modern production. Does that justify leaning so heavily on reference humor?</p><p>Maybe. We all gave The LEGO Movie a pass eight years ago.</p><p>I'm not saying this is as good as The LEGO Movie, but that's probably your best point of comparison in terms of what this movie is trying to do and how it's utilizing its IP. There's nothing in this that delivers an emotional arc on par with what The LEGO Movie pulled off, but that's an unfair bar to set, anyway.</p><p>What most impressed me wasn't the story or characters, but rather the way world is layered. There's a moment when at least five different mediums appear and interact at once. Yes, I know some are cheats (they're clearly using CG to mimic other forms of animation), but it's still a fascinating effect, like a living collage. There's something whimsical about this that transcends the parade of recognizable characters and jokes about corporate mascots.</p><p>Not that the jokes and references are bad, mind you. This is engaging and funny, though perhaps not quite as funny as you want it to be. More than that, the quantity of references is still impressive. I was genuinely shocked what the producers of this got permission to use. This isn't remotely limited to Disney: they got permission to use numerous iconic characters across multiple studios (though there seemed to be a relative lack of Warner Bros IP, I noticed). </p><p>Where the movie slips up a bit is around its human character. Something's off about how she interacts with the world. Tonally, she comes off as less layered than the animated characters. She almost feels like a human character out of a movie in this genre (CG/live-action hybrid) from twenty years ago, despite the fact everything else has evolved. It's an odd disconnect, like she's being directed as if she's in a kid's movie, while the rest of the film is a modern comedy. My guess is they filmed her without other cast members on set, possibly prior to recording their vocal performances.</p><p>Alternatively, I suppose it could have been intentional. Maybe it was yet another meta-joke about its own genre - if so, it didn't quite connect.</p><p>This wasn't perfect, but it was more than good enough. Honestly, I'm a little surprised it got dropped on Disney+, rather than going to theaters, both because it really was a pleasant surprise and because its target audience is less likely to stumble across it on a platform designed first and foremost for young kids. I'm not saying some kids won't enjoy this, but - like Roger Rabbit before it - the humor and references are aimed at their parents.</p><p>Being in the cohort that grew up with Disney Afternoon and most of the other things in this movie, I can certainly be counted among those being catered to, and I certainly had fun with this one. My guess is if you have any idea who these characters are, you'll enjoy it, too.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-90204588156189493222022-04-21T19:46:00.002-07:002022-04-21T19:46:32.947-07:00Movie Review: The Batman<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMEY3I5jM62psqz4uTTaJ9VGa_Rr7EEXIOgsTz6nd6EsIhaEVeFe9f6tNXLTHSHLqcp620zQQWlJodCfoKQOgLZcaG4o-IguUFC0fPagrLyzm11sahZJUKDnGf-icqQsd7S6V5WW_53p_xu8U6edfWVKBbZIHDCqa2WY1ujtVKPcHtqflsjMKTfOW31Q/s4032/PXL_20220422_024056613.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMEY3I5jM62psqz4uTTaJ9VGa_Rr7EEXIOgsTz6nd6EsIhaEVeFe9f6tNXLTHSHLqcp620zQQWlJodCfoKQOgLZcaG4o-IguUFC0fPagrLyzm11sahZJUKDnGf-icqQsd7S6V5WW_53p_xu8U6edfWVKBbZIHDCqa2WY1ujtVKPcHtqflsjMKTfOW31Q/s320/PXL_20220422_024056613.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>I usually try and avoid spoilers in these things, but The Batman's been out for a month and a half and there's enough talking in riddles in the actual movie, so... SPOILER WARNING.</p><p>One of the first movies I reviewed for this blog was <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2008/07/movie-review-dark-knight.html">The Dark Knight</a>. I'll save you the trouble of clicking on the link: in short, I said it was a really good movie, but not all that good of a Batman movie. Jump ahead fourteen years, and we find ourselves with the opposite. Matt Reeves has given us a great Batman movie that's sort of mediocre when considered independent of the title character.</p><p>Oddly, The Batman <i>almost</i> works as a direct sequel to The Dark Knight in a timeline where the third Nolan movie never came out. It picks up at about the same point in Batman's career, with similar power levels and villains who feel stylistically identical to those in the Nolan movie. If it weren't for some minor continuity issues, you could almost handwave this as a chapter in that continuity. </p><p>But let's put a pin in the nerd stuff and talk about this as a movie first. In some ways, I was being unfair earlier when I called this mediocre. Aspects of The Batman are fantastic. This looks gorgeous, the score is magnificent, and for the majority of the runtime it's well paced and exciting. This works well as a crime thriller, which is one of the main things it's trying to be. It's by no means a failure.</p><p>The main area I think this drops the ball concerns character relationships. Large portions of the film focus on Bruce's relationships with three supporting characters: Jim Gordon, Selina Kyle, and Alfred. All of these relationships culminate in dramatic scenes, and yet none actually feel earned. The movie seems to tell us that Bruce and Selina form a bond, but we never really see or feel this. You of course can infer stuff from the comics to fill in the gaps, but it's not in the movie itself.</p><p>This is even more of a problem with Alfred, because we're expected to assume a familial relationship we're not shown. We're given a sequence where Bruce tells Alfred he isn't his father, followed later by one where he tells him he was wrong. What's missing is any kind of establishing sequence where we're shown Alfred <i>being</i> that father. The end effect is hollow.</p><p>I suppose Bruce's relationship with Gordon is a tad better, in that it's more casual so the lack of an establishing sequence is less damaging. It still doesn't deliver much of an emotional punch, though. I feel like they could have devoted more time to all three relationships. The main detective plot (more on that in a moment) could have been trimmed back a bit if they needed room. Honestly, the pacing there is more about tone than story - the Riddler's plan mostly amounts to noise, anyway.</p><p>Now that I'm done complaining about all that, let's talk about why this still kind of rules as a Batman movie.</p><p>I'll start with the detective stuff. While I think they <i>could have</i> simplified that part of the movie without losing the effect, I thought the basic story was absolutely the right approach. The bulk of the movie is a grounded "world's greatest detective" story. While that's certainly not the only valid version of The Caped Crusader, it's arguably the most significant, not to mention one we've never seen seriously attempted on the big screen.</p><p>I also appreciate this adhered to Bruce's "no killing" rule better than any previous live-action incarnation. It's not perfect, mind you: while Batman doesn't appear to kill anyone, there were a few moments where the movie prioritized spectacle and action over clarity. The fight at the end features some blows you could interpret as lethal. Likewise, there's a chase in the middle involving an exploding tanker truck where it's hard to imagine there weren't civilian casualties as a result of Batman's pursuit of the Penguin. I think we're supposed to assume otherwise, given no one brings it up or even arrests the Penguin for causing said explosion, but I found the moment extremely distracting.</p><p>Through the rest of the movie, however, Batman is shown explicitly <i>not</i> killing his enemies, and even discourages allies from using potentially lethal force. This is a refreshing step up from the Nolan movies, let alone Batman v Superman.</p><p>What made me even happier was watching Batman transition from avenger into superhero over the course of the film. The movie is largely a repudiation of vengeance and even justice as motivations for the character: it's the story of Bruce learning his first responsibility is to give people hope. Would I have preferred a Batman movie start with that? Sure. Would I have liked to see a little more genuine empathy and compassion from Bruce? Absolutely. But this is so much more than we've gotten from these movies in decades.</p><p>Honestly, I don't even think that's the primary reason this works as a Batman movie. The element The Batman nails that nearly every other live-action version misses is tone. While ostensibly realistic in its approach, The Batman has a operatic feel, largely thanks to a combination of cinematography and music. While this certainly isn't the surreal Gotham of the Burton movies, the look and sound of the film gives it a sort of mythic character reminiscent of the 90's animated series. Scenes with Bruce and Selina on rooftops could have used a rewrite, but there's no denying the grandeur of it all.</p><p>Speaking of Selina, I doubt it's possible to imagine a more perfect casting choice than Zoë Kravitz. That said, I was a little underwhelmed by how the character was written. I realize this is preference, but I'm a strong believer Catwoman should be Bruce's equal. Here, she's more of a sidekick who's out of her league. I really hope she's written as a more effective character in the sequels. </p><p>Unsurprisingly, Pattinson is great in the role. I'd like to have seen him using the Wayne persona more, though they did a good job finding an excuse to downplay it. I will note I was impressed how the movie managed to sell the secret identity by subtly adjusting how Batman's weapons and vehicles were presented. Bale's Dark Knight always felt like a rich guy in a billion-dollar suit; Pattinson's feels like a weirdo who cobbled everything together. Even with Wayne acting and looking like a depressed goth, I never got the impression his secret would be obvious. If anything, it reinforced the image of him as a celebrity's kid everyone dismisses.</p><p>Let's talk gadgets. I'm glad the Batsuit finally looks good, though there's still room for improvement. I love that the eyebrows are reminiscent of the Adam West suit when they catch the light. I do wish we'd gotten some version of Bat-a-rangs. Likewise, I found the realistic wingsuit silly looking. I suspect it was sort of supposed to be: they wanted that sequence believable, which it was until he walked away from what should have been a crippling impact.</p><p>I was pleasantly surprised by this version of the Batmobile. It was a nice blend of believably low-tech and impossibly effective. That seems to be a constant design theme in the film: the movie wants the audience to suspend their disbelief while still allowing for silly, over-the-top comic book sequences. And for the most part, it works. I'd personally like to see them drift away from realism in later installments, but this is absolutely a good start.</p><p>One area I was less keen on was action. The fights weren't bad, but they weren't spectacular, either. I hope they put more effort into stylizing them in future installments. Comics and animated shows depict the Caped Crusader as almost inhumanly efficient and effective. As much as I despise Batman v Superman, they came close to translating that idea. The Batman feels like a step back in that respect. Again, this is a subjective observation: if you don't care about the comics, this won't bother you.</p><p>Overall, The Batman isn't the best live-action movie about Batman, but I think it's likely the best live-action Batman movie. They get the world and character right in a way the last two iterations did not (three if you count the overrated Joker movie). I think weak writing prevented relationships from standing on their own, which is a problem, and the finale was underwhelming. But at this point I prefer a flawed movie that gives us a decent Batman than the alternative. I like this thing quite a bit and look forward to the sequels.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-22120082416396973342022-04-01T19:41:00.003-07:002022-04-01T19:41:30.902-07:00Movie Review: Moonshot<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYddjgRNidrncGZ1HY7mmdT6e1c_Jdc_hCi6J8QhnsTCnerLM_bnFYQz-gJN4CZCX5VWsWVkglq_vdeTUYcA0vsCUEIrwK8IZle7JqojLiOsqALZlUHaJmo5y1xOOXiC5kURtZ6stJRNLkSBZA84drorybf2W7rWSSjqnU75zgPPpO8uqCLSMqIDzPnQ/s4032/PXL_20220402_023852910.PORTRAIT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYddjgRNidrncGZ1HY7mmdT6e1c_Jdc_hCi6J8QhnsTCnerLM_bnFYQz-gJN4CZCX5VWsWVkglq_vdeTUYcA0vsCUEIrwK8IZle7JqojLiOsqALZlUHaJmo5y1xOOXiC5kURtZ6stJRNLkSBZA84drorybf2W7rWSSjqnU75zgPPpO8uqCLSMqIDzPnQ/s320/PXL_20220402_023852910.PORTRAIT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p>I assume it's entirely coincidental, but it's a little odd this movie was released on HBO Max just a day after Disney+ premiered Moon Knight. The two projects are nothing alike, though oddly Moonshot's tone feels closer to the generic MCU than the surprisingly dark Moon Knight. This one isn't about superheroes, though - just ordinary people. More accurately, it's about an ordinary person and an exceptional person, but I'm getting ahead of myself.</p><p>Moonshot is a romantic comedy/science fiction hybrid, though it's a long way from an even split. Despite some light thematic commentary, the sci-fi stuff is almost entirely here as a backdrop. As far as the story and tone are concerned, this is a pretty straightforward breezy romcom. It's just set on a space ship flying towards a Martian colony three decades from now.</p><p>Overall, I don't consider that an issue, though there's part of me that wishes the "light thematic" stuff offered a little more meat. We get a very light ribbing of corporations and billionaires in the form of a minor character reminiscent of Elon Musk who shows up late in the film. He's the butt of several jokes, and the movie makes a point of reinforcing the message that corporations aren't looking out for our best interests, but I still felt like they treated him with kid gloves.</p><p>Likewise, environmental themes come up, but not in a way that carries much weight. This is the sort of messaging you'd expect from a kid's movie: we should care about our world and try to fix it. We're only ever given hints and brief glimpses into what we're supposed to be fixing, though. Trash is used repeatedly as a symbol, but that's as far as the movie's critique goes. We're not exposed to suffering as a result of environmental degradation or climate change - we're just kind of told there's a lot of garbage.</p><p>Again, I'm not certain this is an actual problem with the movie, because it's not trying to be serious science fiction or satire. This is first and foremost a romantic comedy with an unusual setting. The obvious comparison is The Princess Bride, though it feels unfair bringing that up. Moonshot isn't a tenth as good as The Princess Bride (what is?), but it is a solid entry in the subgenre.</p><p>Solid, but not exceptional. That said, it seems aware of its limitations and comfortable with what it is. This isn't trying to delve deeply into its characters or make them exceptionally complex. These are simple people with simple problems, and it's pretty obvious a few minutes in where the story's heading. Moonshot isn't dark or psychological. It plays at exploring existential questions, but - again - that's all setting. This is a simple love story about young adults, and the target audience is younger than that.</p><p>How much younger? Arguably, quite a bit. There's nothing in Moonshot I'd hesitate to show to a seven year old. It's rated PG-13, so I'm assuming there are a few swears I missed, but beyond that it's pretty tame. There are very brief references to sexuality, but nothing explicit. Likewise, there's no violence and virtually no danger. This is trying to be light and fun, not tense or suspenseful.</p><p>The reason it mostly works is it actually succeeds at being fun. It's a funny situation, the leads do good work, and - most importantly - the script is actually funny. It isn't hilarious, but it's good enough to be entertaining. "Good enough," might be the ultimate summation of the movie in a nutshell.</p><p>If anything, I might be underselling the movie a bit. While this is a long way from brilliant, there are a handful of clever decisions that make it impossible to write off. The design is both colorful and evocative of corporate branded properties in a way that offers a little more commentary than anything actually said in the film. It's also worth mentioning the cast is diverse - unlike some versions of the future, this one isn't populated exclusively with straight, white men.</p><p>I was also impressed the movie subverted the cliché of having the leading man be a mediocre white guy by making that textually the character description. He's essentially the same generic lead movies like this typically feature, but for once the world doesn't automatically elevate him to some sort of icon (or at least it doesn't without commenting on doing so). I nitpicked the movie for surface-level critiques of capitalism and climate change, so it's only fair I credit them with a surprisingly intelligent spin on this trope.</p><p>Aside from that, there wasn't much exceptional about this. But the flipside of that is that there wasn't anything particularly bad, either. The movie is enjoyable and funny enough to make the experience pleasant... just don't expect anything all that memorable.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-1521216678619615672022-03-27T11:35:00.002-07:002023-01-12T20:20:41.455-08:00Catch-Up, Part 9: Best Picture Adjacent<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4bI9PIy1RMJM5G75fUh6-5lElT-MNQeelY8l9foE1LARzDiLgbuU39QuiAuThWX43IANhVQOoQqzcKp_yRnxz5t0hvwzYCh0T44t7w5ymw5mNXGrNnASlh0CdBz4oSYs4dcBy1xfAALbda4uyB2mWJ3uzSyg7ngFG1dTQvwZUptPdF-_4nM9-nWZpZA/s3169/PXL_20220327_183056922.MP.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1900" data-original-width="3169" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4bI9PIy1RMJM5G75fUh6-5lElT-MNQeelY8l9foE1LARzDiLgbuU39QuiAuThWX43IANhVQOoQqzcKp_yRnxz5t0hvwzYCh0T44t7w5ymw5mNXGrNnASlh0CdBz4oSYs4dcBy1xfAALbda4uyB2mWJ3uzSyg7ngFG1dTQvwZUptPdF-_4nM9-nWZpZA/s320/PXL_20220327_183056922.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p>Welcome back to my series of mini-reviews for movies that have been out too long to justify anything more substantial.</p><p>I already uploaded the installment doubling as <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2022/03/catch-up-part-8-best-picture-edition.html">my rankings for this year's Best Picture nominees</a>, but that leaves out a bunch of movies that were nominated in other categories, as well as some from previous years. I've also got one or two that weren't nominated but should have been (That'll do, Pig. That'll do), and a few that had a lot of awards-season buzz.</p><p>Look, no one promised these themes were always going to make sense.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Titane (2021)</b></p><p>I honestly think that's the most messed up movie I've ever seen. I don't seek out highly disturbing movies, and I outright refuse to watch torture porn, so take that with a grain of salt. But with that being said, Titane is... it's pretty horrific.</p><p>That said, it's incredibly well made. It gets under your skin, in your head, and then it just... it does really unsettling things once it's there. Like, really unsettling.</p><p>The movie's narrative doesn't make much sense if you try to understand it rationally, but it all <i>feels</i> right. I found the effect incredibly impressive: I kept thinking the movie should be losing me with each successive step away from reality, but instead it kept me engaged. You believe in the world of the movie, even knowing how ridiculous it would sound if you attempted to explain it. Titane is very much running on dream logic. Nightmares will do that, I suppose. </p><p>Recommendations are particularly tricky. You really want to go into Titane blind, but I'd hesitate to send the wrong person in the direction of this film. Seriously, if you've got the wrong phobia or trigger, this thing could do serious damage. If that sounds like an exciting challenge, then this one's for you. Otherwise... I don't know what to tell you. Maybe find a friend you trust who's seen it and knows what bothers you, then visit them in the asylum they were committed to after watching Titane and ask for their opinion.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Pig (2021)</b></p><p>I went into this relatively blind, which is by far the best way to experience this thing. In that spirit, I'm going to start by saying upfront if you haven't seen this, you should do so without reading further. While I'm not going to go into detail, even discussing genre spoils a lot.</p><p>You were warned.</p><p>Okay, a lot of what makes this delightful is what it isn't. Because, if you know the premise, you know it's about a man, played by Nicholas Cage, trying to reclaim his stolen pig. And if you've seen any publicity artwork, you're likely expecting a cross between John Wick and Mandy. And this... it's not that. At all.</p><p>Because this isn't an action movie. If anything, it's an anti-action movie. It uses the visual language of action movies and related genres, but it subverts every expectation as far as violence is concerned, to the point it starts to feel like Pig is mocking you for expecting Cage to throw a punch or reveal he's ex-military or some other cliché.</p><p>Instead, we're treated to the pacifist equivalent of a crime story, set in the Pacific Northwest, starring Cage at the top of his game. The movie's funny, sweet, intelligent, and profoundly sad. It's beautiful and wonderful, and I hope you didn't read all this before getting to experience it for yourself.</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>Summit of the Gods (2021)</b></p><p>Apparently the backstory here is dense. This is a French animated movie based on a Japanese manga inspired by an ongoing search for a camera belonging to a mountain climber who vanished in the 1920s. The primary story in the movie centers around a pair of fictional climbers, though I doubt I was alone in needing Google to confirm who was real and who wasn't.</p><p>The movie itself is a sort of an existential meditation built around mountain climbing. Tone drives the film - it wants you to feel the epiphanies, fear, and loss its characters go through on their journeys. And to its credit, it does a pretty damn good job selling all that.</p><p>The downside is that's more or less all you get. There is some development and exploration of character, too, but it's mostly in service of its tone and philosophical exercise. Even with a relatively tight focus on just a handful of important characters, you don't feel like you get much more than a surface glance and the outlines of a manifesto.</p><p>That's not a problem - the movie isn't trying to do anything other than what it manages - it's absolutely a success. It's an effective, tense adventure that takes you through an ideology pertaining to mountain climbing and (obviously) any other human endeavor you want to extend the metaphor to.</p><p>If that's what you're looking for, you'll be impressed with the result. But if you're looking for anything else, you'll likely be underwhelmed. This is the sort of movie where one viewer might call it "captivating and profound" while another calls it "boring," and both perspectives have merit.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Tick, Tick... Boom (2021)</b></p><p>I'm not sure whether or not this was a good idea. It's essentially an autobiographical musical from Jonathan Larson, the playwright behind Rent who died just before it became a massive hit. On one hand, the mystique and tragedy of his life are inherently interesting, and the fact there's a way to tell his story in his words and music is really cool. It's the story of him creating his art and contemplating his life and legacy.</p><p>It's just... let's back up and examine what that art actually is, because this isn't the story of Rent. Instead, it's the story of another musical, which ultimately fails to launch and teaches him that he needs to write what he knows, a revelation that results in the creation of the musical we're watching, which...</p><p>I mean, there's a reason this one never went anywhere. Actually, there are several reasons. First, the songs aren't great, which is kind of an issue given the medium. Second, this is, well...</p><p>I feel bad saying this, but let's not kid ourselves: the premise is a fairly generic, self-indulgent story that assumes audiences will find the author's life and point of view meaningful or compelling. And it doesn't help that the parts that are kind of meaningful aren't really his story. Larson lost friends to the AIDS epidemic, and one of them is a major character. Major, but not the main character: this is still about the lessons Larson learned. The way others' tragedies effected him. His pain and growth.</p><p>And... yeah, that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. This kind of "stories about middle-class white authors turned bohemians writing stories" is extremely common. It's practically a cliché: every writer (and I'm no exception) thinks they're special. A lot of writers try to chronicle their lives and tell their story. The reason these don't make up the majority of movies, books, and plays out there is readers and audiences disagree with that assessment.</p><p>Does the fact Larson was ultimately right change that calculus? I guess that depends on whether you're invested in Larson and his legacy. If so, this is likely going to appeal to you. But me? I still haven't actually seen Rent, so, while I know the context, it doesn't mean much to me. I'm left rating this on its own merits, and....</p><p>Look. This isn't bad. Lin Manuel Miranda does a solid job turning this into a movie. He doesn't transform this into something incredible, but he's fine as a director. Meanwhile, Andrew Garfield is really good in the lead. And if you look through the Wikipedia article, the research behind this thing is really impressive.</p><p>But, again, the music isn't all that good, the story isn't particularly interesting or unique, and I didn't find the main character all that likable, in no small part because he clearly believed the story he was writing was worth writing. If that seems like an overly meta complaint, keep in mind, this movie is several adaptations deep, to say nothing of the abandoned play it's partly about and features a song from.</p><p>If you're a fan of Rent, my guess is you've already seen this, love it, and most likely hate me right now. Sorry? But if you're not a big fan of that musical, this probably isn't going to win you over.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>The Last Duel (2021)</b></p><p>I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, which I actually think is kind of a strike against an otherwise pretty good movie. Let me explain: this is ultimately a fairly brutal look at sexual assault and the way society devalues women. The fact the society in question is 14th century France and the issues at play remain completely relevant is basically the point. The details have changed, but the social dynamics are eerily similar. Women's voices are largely ignored, accusations of rape are more dangerous than the crime itself, and vast legal systems give powerful men a host of options and protections. Still pretty damn relevant.</p><p>The problem is those themes are kind of overshadowed by Ridley Scott's preoccupation with settings and atmosphere. That's what really stuck with me - I found the experience of watching that world enjoyable, which feels inherently wrong. This shouldn't be fun or pleasant: it should be upsetting and scary. And, to be fair, when we actually get to the titular duel, it is. There's a lot at stake for the only character we give a damn about.</p><p>Those who aren't comfortable watching sexual assault should of course approach with caution, if at all. The rape scene (scenes, really, though the last one is by far the hardest to watch) is pretty brutal. And, despite unambiguously taking the victim's side, the movie still feels more interested in its male characters.</p><p>Outside of the ending and the assault sequence, this was mostly just fun to watch. In this context, I suppose that counts as both an indictment of the film and as a sort of ironic recommendation for history and D&D nerds.</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>Flee (2021)</b></p><p>An absolutely incredible, heart-breaking film that pushes the boundaries of what animation can be used for and how documentary can be presented. It's hard to overstate how good and how effective this is. It's emotionally devastating, because it's so real and - on some level - so mundane. The experience of the man at the core of Flee isn't unique or even rare. Flee doesn't point fingers or delve into politics, but if you can watch it without feeling ashamed at your country's policies, I don't know what to tell you.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Portrait of a Lady on Fire (2019)</b></p><p>There's a moment at the end of Portrait of a Lady on Fire when I was no longer certain whether I was looking at film, an oil painting, or some sort of animated effect or hybrid. The entire movie was designed and lit to resemble 19th century art, but in this moment, I honestly couldn't tell.</p><p>It was still live action, of course. I'm not sure if my experience was intentional or shared - honestly, I think most of it was in my mind. But that's the sort of magic trick this movie accomplishes through an almost unfathomable control over what you see and hear. It's difficult to convey how meticulous this film is. The most apt metaphor for the experience would be to that of watching a master painter create a portrait. It's a magic trick of storytelling that uses the medium of film with incredible precision.</p><p>I feel like I'm underselling this when I say I love this movie. I am in absolute awe of this movie. It's a work of art.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Parasite (2019)</b></p><p>Maybe my expectations were set too high, but while I enjoyed Parasite, it didn't leave all that much of an impact. Don't get me wrong - it's definitely a great movie. Well acted, extremely well written, and really well shot, I'm not at all confused as to why critics loved this. It just didn't entirely click with me.</p><p>That goes for the other movies I've seen from Bong Joon-ho, too. I wasn't a fan of Snowpiercer, and while I liked The Host, I wouldn't say I loved it (though it's definitely my favorite of the three). All are impressive films, but they weren't for me. Which is honestly odd, because on the surface, it seems like they would be - smart, genre films are typically what I'm looking for.</p><p>Some of this may come down to the endings. I'm not entirely adverse to dark finales, but I find I usually connect more when there's some grand twist or resonant connection. Bong Joon-ho's movies tend to wrap up with the concepts taken to their logical conclusion, coupled with an implied thematic statement. I certainly can't fault that style, but I also can't change what appeals to me.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Dunkirk (2017)</b></p><p>I always feel awkward in situations like these. Dunkirk's clearly well directed - fantastically well directed, in fact, in that it's expertly executed and is clearly as close to a perfect reflection of Nolan's vision as the medium allows. The pacing and editing give the film a relentless sense of dread, despite most of the major characters making it out alive.</p><p>So why was I left thinking, "Is that all?" as the end credits rolled?</p><p>The main issue (I'll leave it to you to decide whether it's an issue with me or the movie) is character. I rarely connect emotionally with characters in Nolan's movies, this time more than usual. Yes, I realize that's intentional. But it still leaves me unsatisfied at the end of most of his films.</p><p>I've watched enough movies to know this is good. And I did find it compelling enough - I liked it overall. But this didn't really pull me in or anything. I understand why its fans love it, and I think the awards were warranted. But when all was said and done, I was left underwhelmed.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Promising Young Woman (2020)</b></p><p>So... yeah. That might be one of the best movies I've ever seen.</p><p>I actually have a lot I'd like to say about this, in particular about my reaction to the ending, but I'm not going to. I honestly don't want to spoil anything. This deserves to be seen cold.</p><p>I will offer a few thoughts on tone, genre, and content, though I'm not sure how coherent they'll be. I'm seeing the movie referred to as a "dark comedy," which I think is <i>technically</i> true, but it doesn't really prepare you for what you're seeing. It's alternatively identified as a thriller, which I think is much closer. Tonally, it feels a little like American Psycho, with two major differences: 1) it's not gory, and 2) I liked it.</p><p>Let's talk content for a moment, because if you know anything about this movie, you know it deals with subject matter that can be difficult for some viewers. For what it's worth, the movie doesn't put much on screen: this is quite literally about the effects, not the actual crime. But that also means it digs into the psychology of its subject matter, which can be brutal in its own way. If that could be an issue, by all means read a plot synopsis before watching. But for everyone else, this is better experienced unspoiled.</p><p>It's a hell of a movie. Just phenomenal writing, acting, directing, and editing. I could go on, but honestly... just watch this.</p><p><br /></p></div><div dir="auto"><p><b>Black Bear (2020)</b></p><p>This was a very weird, very artistic film that I enjoyed but didn't love. To be clear, in this context "didn't love" doesn't mean that this isn't great - I think it's extremely effective at what it's trying to achieve, the pacing is fantastic, and the performances are amazing (with Aubrey Plaza being the standout, though when isn't that the case?). </p><p>What this doesn't do for me is connect. It's a movie about the artistic process, specifically about the dark side of the artistic process. Only like anything related to art, process isn't universal. This isn't how I find inspiration, so I feel a bit removed. That's not a problem with the movie, just a disconnect between me and the film. And, in all likelihood, with a lot of people. In particular, if you're not an artist who's played around in narrative mediums, I suspect this won't mean a great deal to you. That's not to say you won't get it, just that it won't have the same emotional impact it'll have on someone who bases stories on people they've known and situations they've experienced.</p><p>I'm not saying it's not still worth seeing - I think this works well enough as an off-kilter surrealist thriller - but there's a subset of artists I expect will walk away from this feeling like they just watched another Being John Malkovich or Adaptation. I'm just not one of those people.</p></div></div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-1055753045176740722022-03-26T10:55:00.003-07:002022-03-26T10:55:50.508-07:00Why the Best Picture Oscar Doesn't Matter This Year... But the Animated Does<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaCEqvbPYyOSdXI09q3bbtNbdG7Bas9-x0gJGdTKwLmp7r0z26UU4XUtNVCPq2a5N8G5CDC02Ow93-IuZp-KCdrCKqyy0OnDqkfNyeNeUzvOQPIt6vptw3M2hwt75CpdPC8OflNEcV5_nybDXEwy2XTdZ5fZLidzz7C4cAbieYcUgWHPVd29NHgAZ8sw/s3837/PXL_20220325_210906431.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2328" data-original-width="3837" height="194" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaCEqvbPYyOSdXI09q3bbtNbdG7Bas9-x0gJGdTKwLmp7r0z26UU4XUtNVCPq2a5N8G5CDC02Ow93-IuZp-KCdrCKqyy0OnDqkfNyeNeUzvOQPIt6vptw3M2hwt75CpdPC8OflNEcV5_nybDXEwy2XTdZ5fZLidzz7C4cAbieYcUgWHPVd29NHgAZ8sw/s320/PXL_20220325_210906431.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div>I know everyone's laser-focused on the Best Picture race, but honestly I think the stakes are significantly higher in the Animated category this year. I've seen seven of the ten Best Picture nominees, and - with the exception of Don't Look Up - I wouldn't be particularly surprised to see any of them win. And even if Don't Look Up picks up the trophy, I'll mostly just find the whole situation funny (in contrast to Don't Look Up, which I did not find funny in the least).</div><div><br /></div><div>When all's said and done, I don't think any of the Best Picture Nominees I've seen are significantly better than the majority of the other nominees. And while I reserve to change my mind after watching the remaining 30%, I'd be surprised if that were the case (I've seen the ones that are commonly shortlisted as the best of the bunch). This year's crop is pretty uniformly good (again, with that one exception): really good picks, but nothing I'd consider the absolute best, hands down.<br /><div><br /></div></div><div>Likewise, four of the five animated movies up for that category are all fantastic (the odd one out being Raya and the Last Dragon, which is still fine). I have an opinion on which is best, but it's not a particularly strong opinion.</div><div><br /></div><div>But I don't think these awards should <i>only</i> be about which is the "best" movie. Even setting aside the fact it's a hilariously subjective concept, I think that framework ignores some crucial aspects as to which elements should be rewarded and why.</div><div><br /></div><div>First, I think we need to consider whether a movie innovates and changes its category. For what it's worth, I don't believe any of the Best Picture nominees I've seen really check this box (though I can imagine a case being made for Drive My Car). But at the end of the day, the Best Picture nominees are pretty straightforward in their approach. They're entries in their respective genres that do those genres proud, not entirely new creations that change how we look at those genres.</div><div><br />To put it another way, I don't think the 2032 Oscar nominees are going to be appreciably different because these ten movies were made. Tell me that's not the case for Jaws, Star Wars, Black Panther, or Get Out (to name a few past nominees that didn't win but maybe should have).</div><div><br /></div><div>I want to be clear this isn't something I expect all nominees or winners to accomplish, but I do think it's valuable to take it into consideration when picking. If all your movies are equally "good" but one transforms the medium, isn't that the "best?"</div><div><br /></div><div>Alternatively, I think there's value in asking whether a movie is <i>important</i>. Does a piece of art change the conversation about its topic outside of its medium? Does it have the power to influence the world, even a little?</div><div><br /></div><div>This isn't just a matter of having a good theme; you need to convey that theme in an effective manner. The issues Don't Look Up is discussing are of incredible significance, but can you imagine it changing any minds? </div><div><br /></div><div>Granted, a lot of movies are at least somewhat important. I could make a case for several of this year's Best Picture nominees (West Side Story in particular) offering value beyond entertainment, but I don't think any of them are in the same league as Get Out, Promising Young Woman, or Parasite (hey, one of those actually <i>did</i> win).</div><div><br /></div><div>Ultimately, none of this year's nine worthwhile Best Picture nominees has really sparked discussions beyond the limits of the films themselves or forced the medium to evolve. They're all just really well-made movies. And, again, that's not a flaw. There's no reason movies can't just be really good versions of what they are, and I think it's fine to hand the award to whichever one everyone decides is the best.</div><div><br /></div><div>But when a movie is important or has the ability to influence its genre or medium... isn't it extremely valuable to reward that or at least consider it? And while I don't think that's the case with the Best Picture nominees, I <i>absolutely</i> think there are multiple animated nominees that excel in one or both of those categories.</div><div><br /></div><div>With the possible exception of Luca, I actually think all<b> </b>of them are at least somewhat important, by virtue of offering representation for kids who haven't been able to see themselves in movies. The quality of that representation varies - Raya's portrayal of Southeast Asian cultures was fairly surface level - but none of them were entirely without merit. Even Luca is kind of a complex picture, for reasons I'll get to in a moment.</div><div><br /></div><div>But first, I want to talk a little about Flee, because while I think all of these are sort of important, Flee is monumentally so. It's also the only one of the nominees that isn't a kid's movie, which makes that all the more striking. It's easy to make a kid's movie important by virtue of the audience. Kids are impressionable and many are in need of representation. When I say that Raya and the Last Dragon might be more "important" than at least six of the Best Picture nominees, you should absolutely take that as a sign the field isn't level.</div><div><br /></div><div>Flee isn't a kid's film, though. I mean, you could probably show it to teenagers, assuming you can convince them to sit through it, but the themes are intense, the subject matter dark, and the story - while ultimately hopeful - is incredibly sad. Animated or not, this is a movie for adults.</div><div><br /></div><div>It's also maybe the most important film of the year. It provides insight into what refugees experience, in the words of a survivor. It shows us how we appear to those displaced by our wars who are then turned away at our borders. It's heart-breaking, and if you're from the US, Russia, or Europe and it doesn't make you ashamed of your country's policies, I don't know what to tell you.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, yeah, I think Flee is pretty goddamn important. It's also one of two movies I believe will have a significant impact on animation. The nature of that impact is somewhat unusual in that it's not related to the visual or technical side of the medium, but rather the way it's employed. Having a movie like Flee get this level of attention illustrates that animation is far more versatile than the limited ways it's been used by major US studios suggests. I'd be shocked if there weren't imitators, but more than that I expect we'll see studios and producers greenlighting projects they'd never have seriously considered otherwise.</div><div><br /></div><div>Is all that enough to justify a win in this category? That's probably irrelevant. Flee was made on a micro-budget, and my guess is the majority of those voting in this category won't even have seen it. Even among those who have, I think it'd be fair to pick one of the other nominees on the basis that the animation in Flee is comparatively simplistic. If Flee somehow wins, I'll be elated with the choice, but I think it's extremely unlikely.</div><div><br /></div><div>Let's turn our attention back to the other contenders. Of these, the only one I believe makes a substantial stylistic contribution to animation is Mitchells vs. the Machines. It's continuing the work of Into the Spider-Verse by exploring other styles 3D animation can be presented in and further integrating 2D and 3D effects.</div><div><br /></div><div>You could probably make a case for Luca expanding Pixar's stylistic range (which is good!), but I don't think the philosophy they're using is all that different from numerous films from other studios. Ultimately, I think Mitchells is by far the nominee pushing animation the furthest.</div><div><br /></div><div>Is it also the best? I think that's a harder question. Encanto is really, really good. My personal opinion leans slightly towards Mitchells, but if we were just talking about which is "best," it'd probably be a toss-up, with Luca at most a hair's breath away.</div><div><br /></div><div>But, again, I don't just think this should be about which is the best. And on top of everything else, there's an elephant-sized mouse in the room we need to discuss. Three of the five movies up for this award are from Disney, which isn't a surprise - they're kind of the leaders when it comes to animation, after all. And the company deserves recognition for some kinds of representation: it's gotten much better at including characters from different cultures and backgrounds. But there's still one area where their studio is outright regressive, and that's LGBTQ+ representation.</div><div><br /></div><div>To be fair, their competitors have also been fairly slow to change in this area. Television shows have been better, with Steven Universe and She-Ra leading the way. But animated movies have been much slower, likely out of concern they'll anger far-right groups and damage their films' prospects overseas. As a result, the little representation that makes it through tends to be brief and - more often than not - the kind that can be easily cut when distributing to foreign markets.</div><div><br /></div><div>A few weeks ago, I really thought Encanto was more or less a lock for the Oscar. But then, right when the Academy was starting to cast votes, something happened to highlight Disney's failure to include same-sex couples and queer individuals in their movies. I refer, of course, to Florida's draconian "Don't Say Gay" bill and Disney's fumbled response.</div><div><br /></div><div>When Disney's CEO defended his company by claiming their movies were proof they were allies, employees came forward to say publicly what's been obvious for years: <a href="https://variety.com/2022/film/news/disney-pixar-same-sex-affection-censorship-dont-say-gay-bill-1235200582/">that Disney executives have been vetoing attempts by creatives to include queer characters in their movies</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Remember when I hedged on saying Luca wasn't "important?" A lot of people looked at the relationship between its two protagonists as a sort of ambiguous love story. While I'd hope some kids felt represented by the characters, imagine how much more powerful that would have been if it were acknowledged.</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't want to put too much emphasis on Luca. Again, I'm not even sure it was intentional, just as I'm not 100% sure that Raya's relationship with Namaari or Elsa's story in Frozen 2 were originally going to include queer aspects... but I'd probably be willing to put money on any or all of them.</div><div><br /></div><div>I shouldn't need to say this, but this kind of representation is important, especially in films intended for young audience. It's important kids are shown that same-sex relationships are normal and healthy. It's also important they're not stigmatized. Actively censoring these characters and romances sends a message that they're somehow less appropriate than opposite-sex couples.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'm thrilled Disney's finally being called out on this, and I'm hopeful the outcry may result in some of these policies changing. But you know what would really give that a boost? Giving the award that one of their movies was almost a lock for to a different studio for a film that prominently features a gay protagonist.</div><div><br /></div><div>Actually, the Academy has two choices for this, as the main characters in both Flee and Mitchells vs. the Machines are queer. But, again, I don't think Flee is going to take this. If anything wins over Encanto, I'm betting it'll be Mitchells. And doing so will reinforce the message that Disney needs to be better if they want to continue to be seen as leaders.</div><div><br /></div><div>I hope that happens.</div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-17928862841173960272022-03-25T19:58:00.000-07:002022-03-25T19:58:49.116-07:00Catch-Up, Part 8: Best Picture Edition<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjx_FgC6twWeThpe9dWC8kGR3_7leFHWyco84Ibpjip80HJapWLc1PBlsec3hhdyohz4XhmfJCEFrQHP2rfjjXy0VDw0mwlaUBEB4uHeJzSkAOQr0axhPsFkxppajXVBW_qPpdSp9Jwm8EyhPqS0ICR4ppbxEi1SPqdY5cbebJ3L6jz7WCBhTeJK1HRMQ/s4032/PXL_20220325_201352552.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjx_FgC6twWeThpe9dWC8kGR3_7leFHWyco84Ibpjip80HJapWLc1PBlsec3hhdyohz4XhmfJCEFrQHP2rfjjXy0VDw0mwlaUBEB4uHeJzSkAOQr0axhPsFkxppajXVBW_qPpdSp9Jwm8EyhPqS0ICR4ppbxEi1SPqdY5cbebJ3L6jz7WCBhTeJK1HRMQ/s320/PXL_20220325_201352552.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>With the Academy Awards coming up, I thought I'd catch up on some of this year's Best Picture nominees. I wanted to check them all off, but I also didn't want to drop piles of cash subscribing to additional streaming services when I've yet to exhaust the ones I'm already paying for. I'm arranging these in reverse order, so the last movie listed is the one I think *should* win.</p><p>That said, with one exception I think all of the nominees I've seen range from very good to extremely good. Of the seven movies below, four are separated by a hair - I won't bat an eye if any of those win. All of them deserve it.</p><p>I think the movies in spots 5 and 6 are great, but not quite in the same league. I certainly won't be upset if either wins: they're not my picks, but I still really enjoyed them. As for the last movie, well...</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>7. Don't Look Up (2021)</b></p><p>I find it bewildering that this was nominated for Best Picture. The only thing that makes this standout at all is its weirdly impressive cast, the majority of which, to be fair, does great work in a mediocre picture.</p><p>Honestly, "mediocre" might be overly generous. This just isn't well written, directed, or edited. It's a tonal mess that fails to actually deliver on the promise of its premise, which - at this point in time - amounts to screaming the obvious, then kind of muttering incomprehensibly for a couple hours. The central idea is fine (albeit not entirely original - variations on this "joke" have been floating around the internet for a while), but the execution amounts to what might be the most boring version of this movie possible.</p><p>One of the movie's largest sins was failing to deliver on the genre. This was, first and foremost, a satire. But satires are really supposed to reflect reality dialed up to eleven; this thing feels muted and understated. Obviously the threat is bigger and more immediate than climate change, but public reaction in the film feels <i>less</i> comically exaggerated than real world responses to that and COVID.</p><p>The movie's tone undermines itself, as well. The actors clearly think they're acting in a modern day Dr. Strangelove, but the editing tries to interject pathos throughout. The result is neither darkly humorous nor dark: it's just dull. I get what the flashes of stock footage are trying to convey, but I'm just not feeling it.</p><p>I respect the impulse to speak up about climate change, and I share the frustration with a world that refuses to acknowledge the obvious. But, aside from some fun performances, this just doesn't work as a movie, and the point it's trying to make - while absolutely well intentioned - is lacking the teeth it needs.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>6. Nightmare Alley (2021)</b></p><p>Full disclosure: I watched this not realizing it was a remake of a 1947 movie, a fact that's kind of significant in terms of how this hits. Having not seen that or read the book both versions are based on, I'm unable to offer any insight on how this compares or plays off of ideas from the source material. Taken entirely on its own merits as a standalone piece of entertainment, this is...</p><p>Well, it's a noir from Guillermo del Toro, so it's obviously going to be <i>good</i>. But good and satisfying are very different things, and as the end credits rolled, I was a little underwhelmed. I had a pretty good idea how it would conclude from early on, and it more or less circled back to where I expected, and the few surprises it offered felt somewhat unearned. That said, as soon as I realized this was a remake, everything fell into place. Of course the ending was telegraphed: they're assuming viewers are already familiar. And of course the twists are more inline with old genre conventions than believable character motivations: this is a remake of an old genre movie and older novel.</p><p>I get it, and it's well done. Really well done, in fact (though I'm not entirely sold on the Best Picture nomination). Again, it's a good movie. And I loved the first half. But the second half, after the movie shifted away from the carnival, grated on me a bit. Then, as I said, the ending didn't surprise me. These aren't flaws, but ultimately the experience was less than I'd hoped.</p><p>I won't be upset if this takes the prize - it really is a good movie - but I think it's a tier below the nominees in spots 1 through 4.</p><p><br /></p><p>5. <b>King Richard (2021)</b></p><p>This is nothing like I expected. Based on the premise and the fact it was nominated for Best Picture, I assumed this would be a melancholy sports drama with a triumphant ending. Instead, I found myself watching one of the funniest movies of the year. I had a blast.</p><p>That's not to say there's nothing dark or serious in the movie - there are a handful of violent moments when Richard is attacked or his family is threatened, and there's some drama in the third act - but those scenes are exceptions in a film that's otherwise a delightful comedy.</p><p>What impressed me most was the movie's ability to transform what should have been a major liability into its most effective asset: we all know what's going to happen. Hell, even I know Venus and Serena Williams are the best tennis players in the known Universe, and there's no one on the planet who knows less about sports than me. This should have kneecapped the film: it effectively robs them of the ability to build stakes. Instead, they saw an opportunity to exploit the fact that literally everyone is in on the joke. From the second Will Smith's Richard starts making outlandish claims about his daughters' abilities to rich, white people who think he's crazy, we start chuckling because we know who's actually the butt of the joke. The movie exploits this to amazing effect: it's just wonderful.</p><p>If I were ranking this based on my enjoyment, it would be three spots higher. But, unlike my end of year rankings, I'm trying to give my opinion of which movie most deserves the award. And as great as this was, I think the stylistic and tonal complexities of the remaining films place this at a disadvantage.</p><p>That said, I'm certainly not rooting against this. Comedies don't get anywhere near enough respect - I'm thrilled this was nominated.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>4. The Power of the Dog (2021)</b></p><p>I went into this knowing it was an R-rated western, it had been nominated for a pile of awards, and some of the cast. I naturally went in expecting gun fights and bloodshed, which in hindsight feels kind of silly.</p><p>This is, indeed, a western, though it's set quite a bit later than the era that genre is typically associated with. More than that, it's a far more grounded take on the genre. I'm not sure "realistic" is the right word - by its nature, fictional media is rarely if ever realistic - but it's extremely honest about its subject matter. The characters are flawed and believable. None are unbelievably effective or talented. It's a movie set, in more ways than one, in the literal shadow of the mythic west. I should note that it's as much a drama as a western, maybe more so. I'll add it's heavily indebted to a third genre, as well, but I won't reveal which to avoid spoiling the film's resolution.</p><p>This is a great movie, but that's not to say it's going to please everyone. The Power of the Dog is slowly paced and keeps the viewer at arm's length from the characters. It's one of those movies where the narrative feels unfocused until the end, at which point everything snaps together. Anyone looking for action is likely going to feel disappointed; those willing to explore the characters on the movie's terms will find this far more rewarding.</p><p>To be perfectly honest, I found myself somewhere in between those extremes. The Power of the Dog was masterfully made, but I'd be lying if I said it perfectly aligned with my tastes.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>3. Dune (2021)</b></p><p>I've both reviewed this and discussed it on my end-of-year ranking, so I don't really have anything else to say. I'm only including it here to note where I'd put it in these rankings and why. And, for what it's worth, it's held back here for an entirely different reason than it was held back last time.</p><p>Unlike the end-of-year thing, I really am aiming for "best" here, or at the very least the movie I think deserves that award (at least from the ones nominated). And there's a part of me that thinks maybe this should take the statue. I certainly won't be bothered if it wins (that goes for most of the nominees I've seen, though).</p><p>Dune is sort of an unusual situation, where I think it's the best of these, but not the best<i> movie</i>. To put it another way, it's an experience unlike anything else nominated. It's an engrossing, expertly constructed universe, incredible to see and hear. On every technical level, it's really in its own class.</p><p>But it's also half a movie. I don't think that's a big problem for what was being sold, but if we're handing out awards, I think it needs to be taken into consideration. And, when all's said and done, the fact it really isn't a complete film should probably preclude it from taking the prize.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>2. Drive My Car (2021)</b></p><p>This is an extremely difficult movie to describe, because any attempt is likely to make it sound boring and pretentious, and part of what makes this so impressive is it <i>isn't</i>. Instead, I walked away feeling like I'd seen something profound, even before I had a chance to finish parsing out what any of it actually meant. And, hell, I'm still not entirely sure, but that's sort of the point. This is about the connection established between the audience and the thing they're watching. It's about translation, communication, interpretation, and the way stories change us and help us overcome trauma. What you make of the ending is up to you.</p><p>And, yeah, that would usually register as pretentious, but in this case... it just doesn't, at least not to me. Maybe it's because the movie is extremely methodical in its delivery. Or maybe it's just edited in such a way you can't help but be drawn in - I'm honestly not sure why this works as well as it does.</p><p>Regardless, it's a hell of a film. Just a hell of an achievement.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>1. West Side Story (2021)</b></p><p>It's a pretty good sign when the biggest issue I can find with your adaptation of one of the most famous musicals in history is there are a couple character decisions that never felt believable in the source material you only <i>mostly</i> managed to smooth over and sell in the context of the movie. Otherwise, this is about as close to flawless as adaptations or remakes get and easily one of the best movie musicals ever made. Visually, it offers a gorgeous world that feels like it's set at the intersection of '60s film and stage. It's an engaging, beautiful accomplishment deserving of the accolades it's received.</p><p>I honestly don't know what else to say - this was a fantastically well-made movie. It's one of Spielberg's best films, which is saying quite a bit.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-86838348614559783572022-03-14T21:02:00.001-07:002022-03-14T21:02:09.353-07:00Movie Review: The Adam Project<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi9hyRWfl-UhFAg93u1pp0tw15krnr0cNzfFtCI03WLrw8PgkzlY28UMTILzCjEupYQeaurhygiAKvWRVkNty4UUv7hKB4rMfmfj-roZ0h7AIiGzrvBry2J484bfucaJZIs9F1KNgGtZK5rIGgw3CD7m76RKY58RNG14KAvyXC7hXiJk_LD2PeCjGg-qQ=s2752" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2574" data-original-width="2752" height="299" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi9hyRWfl-UhFAg93u1pp0tw15krnr0cNzfFtCI03WLrw8PgkzlY28UMTILzCjEupYQeaurhygiAKvWRVkNty4UUv7hKB4rMfmfj-roZ0h7AIiGzrvBry2J484bfucaJZIs9F1KNgGtZK5rIGgw3CD7m76RKY58RNG14KAvyXC7hXiJk_LD2PeCjGg-qQ=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br />The Adam Project blends goofy sci-fi action with a serious exploration of grief and trauma, and it probably should have just stuck with the goofy stuff. That's not to say the drama is particularly bad, but even at its best it's sort of a buzzkill. The comedy mostly works, the action is pretty good, the genre stuff is solid... the serious stuff is a bit boring. Not excruciatingly so, but it just doesn't connect enough to compensate for taking time and attention away from the fun, adventurous stuff going on.<p></p><p>And I think it needs stressing: the fun stuff is actually quite a lot of fun. It's not particularly original or abnormally well done, but for a B-grade PG-13 kid's flick, it's significantly better than it has to be. The Adam Project has a by-the-numbers feel, but that doesn't stop the stuff that works from being fun, even when you can see and hear the "influences."</p><p>And let's be clear: the influences are readily apparent. Even if you overlook the fact that 80% of its adult leads are Marvel alums, The Adam Project clearly yearns to be an MCU movie in general and a James Gunn movie in particular (if you wrote a computer algorithm to mimic Gunn's needle drops, I'm pretty sure it would have made the same choices). Throw in a touch of Star Wars (and maybe a little of the 2009 Trek reboot), and you've got a good idea for the style and tone. Honestly, the most baffling part of this production is that it was picked up by Netflix instead of Disney+.</p><p>As a movie, this feels hollow but still mostly good. This is disposable, derivative entertainment, but as long as you come to terms with those limitations there's a lot of fun here. A lot of the credit rests with the editing and effects work, which manages to consistently be good enough to maintain the energy. I also think the cast and director deserve credit. The characters aren't particularly complex or interesting, but they're entertaining and cool. Imagine a slick comic book, and you'll have a good idea of what to expect from the bulk of the film.</p><p>While I keep bringing up Marvel, I'll say the movie this most remined me of was actually Zathura (though there's a pretty big Marvel connection there via that movie's director). In addition to some shared ideas, it went for a similar tone and mostly succeeded. That said, I don't think this is nearly as good, largely because Zathura managed to integrate its emotional journey better with the genre stuff.</p><p>I should also add something about The Adam Project's overuse of references. Oh, yes, this movie is self-aware, and it wants you to know it. This was also an issue in the last movie Shawn Levy and Ryan Reynolds collaborated on, Free Guy, but I found it far more grating here (side note: if you haven't given Free Guy a chance yet, it's kind of great - by far the better of the two). I'm not sure how what to make of Levy signing on to direct Deadpool 3. Obviously, those meta-references are going to be far more appropriate, and it's certainly stylistically the kind of thing he's interested in. But while Deadpool 3 is a good fit for Levy, I'm not convinced he's a good fit for it: he's not an especially interesting director, and even at his best he feels like he's mimicking other filmmakers. But, hey, Free Guy was really good, so here's hoping. Deadpool 2 felt kind of generic and lacking in directorial voice, too, so there's a good chance this will at least be a lateral move.</p><p>Since I'm me, I'm going to say a little about the genre elements, particularly the time-travel stuff. The Adam Project does a good job establishing its rules quickly and effectively. That said, the third act gets a little sloppy around execution. I'm not sure I consider this a flaw, though. My guess is there were earlier drafts of the script that checked all the boxes and remained faithful to the rules and logic of the story. I'm also guessing the pacing was significantly worse in those drafts. I'm trying to avoid spoilers here, but they actually had the tools necessary to "resolve" the movie according to the established rules with an extra five or ten minutes of explanation and problem solving... all of which would have broken the pacing that was already strained around the dramatic resolution. Skipping ahead via generic movie magic was probably the lesser of two evils.</p><p>At the end of the day, The Adam Project is a mediocre film but a pretty good time. There's a lot to nitpick here (as I just illustrated), but let's put things in perspective: the fact this was basically okay instead of godawful feels miraculous when compared against the sort of things coming out before the MCU raised the bar. Look, I grew up in the '90s, and I can think of maybe two or three PG/PG-13 genre movies from that entire decade that can match this. The Adam Project isn't great cinema by a longshot, but for a direct-to-streaming kid's time-travel flick, it's plenty good enough.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-18210663292069724732022-03-12T20:06:00.003-08:002022-03-12T20:06:28.519-08:00Movie Review: Turning Red<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjlkjiONyrATmB2MSXSZppAOnxUflv9-TJZVr0Os6-bvY_1iQ15Ym4PHT-09wpS9L2K7Lcs2DncGY8c9XuSRRkqyudKkZpesvj6SnSKr73QSbM-31AXeoqdmBD-6XbFq-fyUREOHy2q_xkq_ZHUE4Cd7fIo7EaHnBP9XG7c1lnWfSA-OkyGwARSyj17RQ=s3736" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2304" data-original-width="3736" height="197" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjlkjiONyrATmB2MSXSZppAOnxUflv9-TJZVr0Os6-bvY_1iQ15Ym4PHT-09wpS9L2K7Lcs2DncGY8c9XuSRRkqyudKkZpesvj6SnSKr73QSbM-31AXeoqdmBD-6XbFq-fyUREOHy2q_xkq_ZHUE4Cd7fIo7EaHnBP9XG7c1lnWfSA-OkyGwARSyj17RQ=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p>Turning Red is great. It's gorgeously animated, extremely funny, and emotionally effective. It's Pixar quality without being overly beholden to the studio's usual formula. It's a wonderful movie, and you should go watch it immediately.</p><p>Also, it's weird as hell in ways I honestly wasn't expecting. I want to be clear, this isn't a complaint. If anything, I was impressed with the movie's willingness to deviate from the norm, though there were occasionally choices I found slightly distracting. For instance, the film is quite explicitly set in 2002. The movie goes out of its way to establish and remind us of this several times. But with the possible exception of a Tamagotchi, nothing unique to that era felt particularly relevant to the story or setting (the Tamagotchi served a fairly large role, but it would have been easy to replace it with something else). I can't find an obvious reason for setting the movie in this particular era, though I can't think of any reason to prioritize using a less specific time.</p><p>Again, that's not a complaint. While I found the decision slightly distracting, it was a small price to pay for the experience of seeing something that looked and felt different than anything I've seen from Pixar to date. And make no mistake: this is absolutely something new.</p><p>I'm not talking about the lead character or themes, either - I'm talking style. The movie is set in Toronto, but it's a version of Toronto bathed in pastels. I understand aspects of the look were inspired by anime, but the effect doesn't match anything I can think of. It feels almost like a three-dimensional watercolor painting, or maybe a kid's picture book. I'm not sure why they chose to match this style with this story, but it absolutely works. On paper, I almost think it shouldn't: this is a coming of age story - I'd expect something more realistic would be a more obvious choice. But while I'd be pressed to explain the rational behind this style, the effect is nothing short of inspired. I was pulled in by the visuals immediately.</p><p>It's a good thing, too, because while the style won me over at once, the comedy did not. The humor in the first act felt a bit too over-the-top for the otherwise grounded opening. Until the movie introduced its magical elements, I was ready to dismiss it as a beautifully animated movie that didn't quite work tonally.</p><p>I should have had more faith. As soon as the second act started, all the setup started paying off. The jokes landed, the characters developed depth, and I was invested. From that point on, everything worked for me. And, hell, I'm not even a furry.</p><p>Oh, yeah. Did I mention this movie is kind of about furries? I don't mean that in the conventional sense, where you could argue anything about were-creatures or animal transformation might be of interest to furries. I mean, the look of the main character's transformation absolutely appears to be a direct reference to that subculture.</p><p>Again, a weird choice for a kid's movie, but it absolutely works in context. That sentence is basically the movie in a nutshell: this is the sort of movie Pixar <i>doesn't</i> made. It's in a different style, from a different point of view, and is set in the last place and time you'd expect from this studio. Domee Shi is far from the directorial voice the studio is known for. Thank God they they could see the value of that voice, because Turning Red is fantastic.</p><p>I really hope this represents the philosophy we'll see driving the next era of Pixar. As much as I've loved the studio in the past, they too often lean on structures, tones, and styles they've used before. Turning Red delivers all the quality Pixar is known for, but it does so in its own way, from a fresh perspective. I loved it.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-22532748904867873272022-01-02T12:31:00.000-08:002022-01-02T12:31:00.996-08:00Catch-Up, Part 7: Assorted Genre<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhny8Ks_WnZKH1dmeE4dFfdQgzj76PRR0SPrwF74QVlIbQ3tWBjSV-MarYRk7UDCj2_8mNY7A9Tg0m-hKpr3xh4ddqkBpA2W19fZx65s7pdBYF1uoxvcnHKGm2oXTFgBJq90HGQaKR-oJPrlusJcN4stdtJK1AVFMsOahDE41oYdlx77ndwO3DF8b4oXQ=s3331" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1277" data-original-width="3331" height="123" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhny8Ks_WnZKH1dmeE4dFfdQgzj76PRR0SPrwF74QVlIbQ3tWBjSV-MarYRk7UDCj2_8mNY7A9Tg0m-hKpr3xh4ddqkBpA2W19fZx65s7pdBYF1uoxvcnHKGm2oXTFgBJq90HGQaKR-oJPrlusJcN4stdtJK1AVFMsOahDE41oYdlx77ndwO3DF8b4oXQ=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p>Oh, right. I'm actually supposed to be posting these. Some of these writeups are more than a year old. I was collecting them for when I had enough to post. Then I had enough and just forgot.</p><p>Oops. Guess you get a long list this time.</p><p>As a reminder, these are recent-ish movies I didn't bother giving full reviews, usually because they weren't recent enough to justify one. In a few cases, I just didn't have enough to say to warrant a full length review, but still wanted to collect my thoughts. The theme this time is assorted genre, which is a nice way of saying I had a bunch of unrelated stuff I wanted to post about.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>November (2017)</b></p><p>This is almost certainly the most obscure entry in this list, at least as far as American audiences are concerned. It's also the weirdest, an Estonian horror/fairytale film about a medieval village contending with dark forces, magic, the plague, and more.</p><p>I wanted to see it in part because of it's extremely loose connections to Christmas movies, though I was never under any illusions I'd be able to justify writing it up for <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/">Mainlining Christmas</a>. Still, the winter folklore elements intrigued me, so I wanted to give it a watch anyway. And it was...</p><p>Well, it was extremely bizarre. I know I already said that, but it bears repeating. The movie is sort of a mashup of ideas and characters from European folklore, all jumbled together. I believe the idea was to convey the feeling of life in the middle ages, complete with the superstition, fear, and uncertainty that would have been ever present. To that end, the Devil appears several times as a sort of comical figure (albeit a dangerous one). Likewise, the plague is personified as a character (albeit not always as a literal person). There are also automatons powered by souls, wandering ghosts, and the main character is sometimes a werewolf.</p><p>If that sounds like a lot, it is. And the movie doesn't really attempt to make it coalesce into a coherent story. This is more about feel than narrative. The area the movie really shines is in the visuals. It's shot in black and white, though that description doesn't begin to convey just how mesmerizing all of this is, appearing at times more like illustrations.</p><p>I wouldn't say I loved this one, but I definitely admire what was accomplished. This is definitely one of those times the things that didn't work for me were clearly intentional, rather than flaws, but the relatively light story and occasionally nonsensical continuity didn't entirely win me over. Regardless, it's a fascinating movie that succeeds in what it sets out to do.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Sonic The Hedgehog (2020)</b></p><p>I feel a little embarrassed admitting this, but I mostly enjoyed this thing. For what it's worth, I think this is as close to a good adaptation as a property like this could reasonably aspire to. I say close, because there are several areas where improvements wouldn't have been hard, starting with the color grading. The world looks drab and grey, which might be fine for a suspense, but... this is a kid's adventure, right? Like, it's supposed to be a cartoon, isn't it?</p><p>That and half the dialogue qualify as low hanging fruit: easy issues that could (and should) have been fixed. But the other half of the dialogue is solid. Not great or intelligent or anything, but funny and entertaining. Likewise, the video game superhero stuff is fun. Nothing to write home about, but compared to what I was expecting, it wasn't bad.</p><p>More than that, this threads a needle virtually every previous video game adaptation fumbles and successfully delivers something that feels connected to its source material without being abysmal. For context, this is pretty similar to Rampage in terms of quality, but that movie only connects with its source on the flimsiest, most superficial of levels. On the other end of the spectrum, Mortal Kombat does a pretty decent job capturing the flavor of the games, but it fails miserably as anything resembling a movie. Sonic walks that line pretty well, all things considered.</p><p>Is it good? God, no. But it's okay. Disposable. Kind of fun. Think the better late '90s/early '00s CG/live-action hybrids. That's a far cry from a ringing endorsement, but in the scheme of things... I didn't dislike it, so take from that what you will.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Save Yourselves (2020)</b></p><p>For the most part, this movie was a lot of fun. The two leads play off each other brilliantly, and the central conceit of the movie - a hipster couple trying to survive an alien invasion they spend the first third of the movie failing to notice - is hilarious.</p><p>Where the movie stumbles a bit, at least for me, is in the finale. I didn't hate the ending, but it also feels too on-the-nose, like they're trying to transform the central comedic gimmick into a theme. </p><p>But the rest of the movie was funny enough I'm inclined to give it a pass. This makes fantastic use of its limited budget, to a degree I almost wish they'd had less money for effects. It already evokes old British TV sci-fi, and I honestly think a version literally made with those limitations would be even more effective.</p><p>Still, a nice gem of a movie worth checking out.</p><p><br /></p><div><b>Tenet (2020)</b></div><div>This is closer to a magic trick or a complex math problem than a movie, but I actually like magic tricks and math, so... yeah, I dug this. It's a shame the characters were paper thin and boring, and obviously it would be great if someone could talk with Nolan about the whole "being able to understand the dialogue" thing, but the central gimmick was honestly a blast to watch.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>The Invisible Man (2020)</b></div><div>I feel like this one's been covered, and there's not much more to say than, "Yeah, it was pretty great."</div><div><br /></div><div>It lost a little steam at the end - I'm rarely a fan of "double-twist" endings (i.e.: endings where there's a last minute wrinkle that seemingly subverts where you thought the story was heading, but then it's revealed that wrinkle was a fake-out, and the original thing turns out to be true) - and... yeah, this does that. It kind of works with the theme, so it's not entirely superfluous, but it's pretty easy to imagine a version of this movie that's fifteen minutes shorter and delivers the same punch. To put it another way, this didn't need a fourth act.</div><div><br /></div><div>But that's a minor quibble. While the ending could have been more succinct, it was still satisfying. And the movie as a whole was well constructed and executed. Also, well acted: Elizabeth Moss is amazing.</div><div><br /></div><div>The real selling point here, though, is the conceit. This updates the "invisible man" premise in a way that's compelling, disturbing, and psychologically believable. It's science fiction done right.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>The Dead Don't Die (2019)</b></div><div>The Dead Don't Die is kind of a blend between independent film and schlocky B movie. Think an updated, self-aware take on Plan 9 from Outer Space.</div><div><br /></div><div>It's self-referential to a degree that's jarring, but that's intentional. The movie wants to poke its audience and watch us squirm. It's quite a bit gorier than the average comedy/horror hybrid, particularly given how heavily it leans towards comedy, but - again - it wants you to squirm. It wants to play with your expectations, your confusion, and - at times - your frustration.</div><div><br /></div><div>I didn't like this anywhere near as much as Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai or Only Lovers Left Alive, but I still liked this quite a bit. But then I like slow-burning comedies where the goal is less to make you laugh than to build a complex, multi-layered joke over the course of a movie. That's not to say there aren't conventional jokes in the movie, but this is one of those movies that's mostly a comedy by virtue of being a joke itself.</div><div><br />For the record, that's just one of at least dozen ways it's "meta."</div><div><br /></div><div>This definitely isn't for everyone. Hell, I don't even think it's for every fan of Jim Jarmusch. But I appreciated it.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>New Mutants (2020)</b></div><div>This is one of those times I need to separate a comic book adaptation into its quality as a movie and its quality as a superhero movie, because the schism is even more pronounced with New Mutants than usual. As a film, this fails miserably: the dialogue is clunky, the tone is uneven, the characters are underdeveloped... I could go on, but you get the gist. This isn't a good movie.</div><div><br /></div><div>And yet... I'd rank it above at least half the movies in the Fox X-Men franchise, including several that are significantly better by any rational set of metrics. Because while New Mutants is bad, it's also kind of a blast. And it's a blast in the way comics are a blast: it leans into the weird, unexplained, non-reductive logic of its source material and just... puts that on screen.</div><div><br /></div><div>When X-Men was originally adapted more than two decades ago, a decision was made to streamline decades of continuity crossing numerous genres into what was seen as the core of the franchise. In other words, they started with the premise that the X-Men were sci-fi characters in a relatively grounded sci-fi world. Anything that didn't conform to that was dropped.</div><div><br /></div><div>I understand why they made that call, and it's hard to fault the logic, but... Well, as someone who likes comics, I've always missed all the weird stuff. Superhero stories can be told as science-fiction, but really they're significantly larger and stranger. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the source material knows some mutants have powers that make them adept at using magic.</div><div><br /></div><div>New Mutants, for all its flaws, embraces that: there's inexplicable, weird magic in the movie. Sure, it ostensibly ties back to mutation, but it's still explicitly magic. And I'm not even talking about the giant demonic bear. The genre content of this movie is, well, bonkers in the best possible way. On top of that, it looks pretty great, too. When this movie cuts loose, it's a metric ton of fun.</div><div><br /></div><div>Does that excuse the rest for being a dull, by-the-numbers YA adventure flick? Not really. But honestly I'd gladly sit through a bunch of scenes of teenagers regurgitating cliched dialogue in exchange for a third act full of comic book mayhem than endure yet another "pretty good" X-Men movie too timid to actually put the fun stuff onscreen.</div><div><br /></div><div>One last thing, with the caveat I'm about spoil the one thing in this movie that probably shouldn't be spoiled: how the hell did the first mainstream Marvel/DC superhero movie built around a same-sex romance come out without making a splash? I mean, I know we all had a lot on our minds that year, and New Mutants was hardly critically acclaimed, but fans have been demanding better representation in these for decades and this... actually delivers.</div><div><br /></div><div>I kind of think Fox dropped the ball by withholding this for so long. If this had been released a few years earlier (i.e.: back when it was originally supposed to come out), I think it would have been huge. Sure, critics would still have shredded it, but between the queer romance and the comic book logic, this would have had a real shot at building a fanbase. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Mary and the Witch's Flower (2017)</b></div><div>So... did dubbing win the war when I wasn't paying attention? I ask because I've been running into foreign animated movies streaming where there was no longer an option to see them subtitled.</div><div><br /></div><div>My issue with dubbing is largely that I'm often left wondering if I actually saw the <i>right </i>movie. Was the replacement dialogue an accurate translation or were excessive liberties taken to line up speech to mouth movements?</div><div><br /></div><div>In the case of Mary and the Witch's Flower, it might make a difference. The animation was gorgeous, but the story was, well, incoherent. Since I only watched the dub, I don't know for certain whether character arcs were sacrificed to avoid moments of awkward translation. Then again, the reviews seem to agree there wasn't much substance here, and I'm assuming at least a few of them got to see alternate versions.</div><div><br /></div><div>As presented, this was fine as a facsimile of Miyazaki. But there are plenty of better options out there. I can't imagine recommending anyone seek this out when there are countless better alternatives.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Game Night (2018)</b></div><div><div>I've been hearing good things about this comedy for years now, but I never found a chance to see it. I finally got around to it, and...</div><div><br /></div><div>Yeah, pretty much what I expected. That's not a bad thing - again, I expected it to be good, and it was. I was really impressed with the digital miniature effect they pulled off in establishing shots. Plus, Rachel McAdams was hilarious in this. All in all, it made for a fun movie.</div><div><br /></div><div>Not sure it'll be all that memorable, though. To be fair, comedies rarely are, which is why I usually don't prioritize seeing them (which in turn is why it took two years to get to this).</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019)</b><br />At this point, the Fast & Furious series has devolved into the equivalent of a cartoon, culminating in what may be the dumbest installment yet. And I'd like five or six more just like this, if that's not too much trouble.<br /><br />No, seriously, I loved this. It's basically the GI Joe movie we wanted instead of the ones we got (side note: I haven't seen Snake Eyes yet, so don't read this as an indictment of that). The villains are COBRA or AIM or some other ridiculously evil group bent on world domination. The movie recycles the premise of the worst Mission Impossible movie, but makes it work.<br /><br />I don't care that Hobbs is a watered-down version of the guy we met four or five movies ago. I don't care that there's literally no way to reconcile Shaw's turn from ruthless killer in Furious 7 to the well-meaning renegade in this movie. I don't care that the premise, setting, and physics of this franchise have been retconned to a point nothing makes a damn bit of sense when compared with earlier installments.<br /><br />Hobbs & Shaw is juvenile, absurd nonsense in the vein of every '80s cartoon I watched growing up. More please.</div><div><br /></div><div><p><b>F9: The Fast Saga (2021)</b></p><p>Basically, everything I thought about Hobbs and Shaw applies here, as well. These movies are GI Joe at this point, complete with absurd super-science vehicles and comic relief. I realize a lot of people consider that a bad thing, but - honestly - I just think they're fun as hell. The jokes are funny, the over-the-top action is funny, and the drama is <i>really </i>funny.</p><p>Is this the best in the series? No, probably not. Though, to be honest, I'm at a point where I'm finding it harder and harder to separate which installment had which plot and introduced and/or redeemed which villain. Also, I don't think I care - these things are popcorn. But they're really good popcorn, and my only regret is there's supposedly an end coming. I'd prefer these just went on forever.</p><p><br /></p></div><div><b>Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)</b><br />Dark Fate is tough to bucket. It's not exactly good as a whole, but most of its component pieces are excellent. The premise is comprised of layers of inspiration, but the script is, well... bad. The pacing is a mess, and some of the dialogue (particularly when the movie is trying to be serious) is hard to sit through.<br /><br />But having acknowledged those flaws, Dark Fate dumps a metric ton of moments, characters, scenes, and ideas, each "worth the price of admission." The action is great, thanks to some inventive redesigns. Mackenzie Davis's Grace is a fantastic addition to the franchise mythology, Sarah Connor is somehow even cooler than she was in T2, and "Carl" is one of the best twists we've gotten in years. Likewise, the politics driving the story are fantastically thought-out, and there's some fascinating depth behind the archetypes of the film's three leads.<br /><br />The skeletal structure underneath Dark Fate is damn near perfect; it's just the overlying skin that's weak. Moments that shouldn't be spelled out are made a bit too explicit (Carl's last line is an obvious example), and the constant barrage of action gets a tad monotone. I'm convinced with a little work on the script this could have rivaled the first two installments of the series. As is, it's still a damn enjoyable experience.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Creed II (2018)</b><br />There was really no chance this was going to be as good as its predecessor, but that's so high a bar I feel bad just bringing it up. Creed is easily one of the best sports movies ever made, a successor to Rocky as good or better than the original.<br /><br />And Creed II is... well, it's pretty good. It's a solid movie, but it doesn't manage to deliver the gravitas that came naturally with the last installment. Something feels off with almost every character arc: the ideas are there, but I kept feeling like the movie was pulling its punches.<br /><br /><i>Side note: I feel bad about that pun, but I'm leaving it in, mostly to punish myself for writing it. Come on, Erin - you're supposed to be better than that.<br /></i><br />At any rate, I found this enjoyable but ultimately unfulfilling. To its credit, this felt like an extension of Creed, which is no small accomplishment. I'm not sure there was any chance this wouldn't be a little disappointing following in that film's shadow.<br /><br />Still, the big fight resolved perfectly, so they stuck that landing.<br /><br />That's right. Stuck the landing. Because one boxing pun was already pushing it.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><b>Palm Springs (2020)</b><br />I went into this with high expectations, largely due to the stellar Rotten Tomatoes score. Maybe I'd have been off not knowing more than 90% of critics gave it a pass, because I found the experience something of a mixed bag.<br /><br />For what it's worth, I thought there was more good than bad. I like the spin on a time loop, both in how it worked with theme and its SF connections. I read a few books on the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics back in college, and it was refreshing to see those ideas integrated into the metaphysics of the story. If what I just wrote is meaningless, don't worry - you can choose to watch this as a typical time loop story in the vein of Groundhog Day. But if you know what to look for, this actually plays with theories of the multiverse where time doesn't exist independently from alternate dimensions. It's all background, but it's definitely there. I was impressed to see that level of depth.<br /><br />I was happy with the nerd-stuff, so you can probably guess my problem was with the narrative. To be fair, it was only with half the narrative, specifically Andy Samberg's character's arc. He plays Nyles, a character I was initially excited by. There was a great premise behind him, but I didn't feel like it paid off the way Cristin Milioti's Sarah's story did. Her arc felt complete and compelling, and I loved the twists and turns her story took.<br /><br />But Samberg's didn't work for me. I honestly felt like it was missing an entire act where he should have grown and changed as a person instead of just... suddenly just realizing everything he needed to develop. The ending felt hollow to me, and that's a shame. If they pulled off the conclusion, this absolutely would have landed on my shortlist of great low-budget SF movies.<br /><br />It's still good, thanks to the premise, concept, and cast. But I wanted it to be great, and it just missed the mark.</div><div><br /></div></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Bill and Ted Face the Music (2020)</b></div><div>This certainly wasn't what I expected.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'll admit it's been a while since I saw the first two installments in this series, but this felt different than I remember. Not necessarily worse, mind you: just different. More than that, it felt different in the opposite way these things usually feel different. When a franchise vanishes for two or three decades than reemerges with a sequel, there's sort of an unspoken rule the new installment is going to be darker than the originals.</div><div><br /></div><div>This was basically a kid's a movie.</div><div><br /></div><div>Which... okay, I guess you could make a case the first two were, as well, but assuming I'm remembering right (again, it's been a while), they kind of skirted the line between kid's humor and teen comedy. Maybe that's splitting hairs, but I expected something a touch more grownup, particularly given the themes of Face the Music.</div><div><br /></div><div>Is any of that an issue? Not really. There's nothing inherently wrong with kid's movies, and this is a solid family-friendly comedy. It's funny, sweet, and entertaining enough. I don't expect it'll be as memorable as the first two, but it's a worthy successor.</div><div><br /></div><div>My only substantive complaint is I felt like the movie underplayed the significance of its third act twist. Said twist wasn't exactly surprising - I doubt I'm alone in knowing where this was heading from the first trailer - but it was a good direction to take the story. I wanted them to explore the significance around that reveal, but instead they just kind of wrapped everything up.</div><div><br /></div><div>Still, this was a solid comedy and a good conclusion to the series. Maybe it could have been more, but... well... this is Bill and Ted we're talking about. These movies were good, but they never came close to being great or profound or anything. I can hardly fault the third movie for maintaining that quality.</div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-53700848879759544472021-12-31T12:58:00.000-08:002021-12-31T12:58:00.445-08:002021 Retrospective<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj-blu6Wxw7KrH-oQP_selum7xE54yNcsFMJvBu6AzQ-q45K2luTpnT54Hb8cdFx0tghvma3HGAGtedCsZ_74ws7iUayz_Jf1RynyLNK2U4hBIJI7sC5Qn-w4KjMtINJLkHgkavXJeh4FNVOb35XNW7EZ1vnXWClYnQk-V1kMhNJXrn6xenSv_z2fnekg=s4032" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj-blu6Wxw7KrH-oQP_selum7xE54yNcsFMJvBu6AzQ-q45K2luTpnT54Hb8cdFx0tghvma3HGAGtedCsZ_74ws7iUayz_Jf1RynyLNK2U4hBIJI7sC5Qn-w4KjMtINJLkHgkavXJeh4FNVOb35XNW7EZ1vnXWClYnQk-V1kMhNJXrn6xenSv_z2fnekg=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p>2021 broke me. I mean, I think this year broke all of us, but I'm not talking existential quandaries, psychological breakdowns, or emotional issues. It probably left a mark in those areas, as well, but for now I'm talking about how I categorize media. In past years, I tried to differentiate between TV movies and "real" movies. This of course has become more and more difficult over time, as movies intended for theaters have been redirected to streaming and movies made for streaming have gotten bigger. I sort of went by instinct for the last few years, and I probably could have again this time, but...</p><p>Ultimately, I decided I didn't care enough about being fair. So this time, the list includes everything - every single movie I saw in 2021 that was released domestically this year. All of them.</p><p>Yes, that includes all the crappy Christmas movies I sat through for <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/">Mainlining Christmas</a>.</p><p>As always, these are ranked from my least to most favorite, which won't always perfectly match my opinion as to which are better or worse. I know we're talking gradations of subjectivity, but I do genuinely believe there's a difference.</p><p>There are a <b>lot</b> of movies I didn't get to, either, particularly recent theatrical releases. I want to see Eternals and Far From Home, but between having a young kid and there being - you know - a goddamn pandemic, it's just not worth it. Everything below was streamed or watched on Blu-ray. There are a few places it probably made a difference, but who knows?</p><p>Before I get started with the list, there's one "movie" I need to revisit that - try as I might - I just can't rank. It's simply too unique an artifact, for both better and worse, to compare against anything that came out this year.</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>NOT RANKED: <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/03/movie-review-justice-league-snyder-cut.html">Zack Snyder's Justice League</a></b></p><p>I wrestled with whether to include this. It's somewhat unique among modern movies, to the point I hesitate to use the word at all. It almost feels more like a miniseries stitched together, which makes sense, since at one point it was literally going to be released as a miniseries.</p><p>There are aspects to this that are absolutely worthy of praise. Some of the effects are jaw-dropping: for all his faults, Zack Snyder knows how to deliver on spectacle. And some of the character beats are fantastic. But the pacing here was just awful, and the tonal shifts were in some ways worse than the theatrical version.</p><p>My main takeaway was that we got two versions of Justice League, and both were completely wrong. The 2017 movie was a studio-mandated mess devoid of vision, while the Snyder Cut was... well, it was entirely the vision of a guy who probably shouldn't have had full control of something like this. He's a good director who needs someone competent holding the reins, but the executives producing Justice League in 2017 were about as far from competent as you can get. </p><p>What Warner Bros should have made in the first place is a version that looked like this but was cut to around 2.5 hours. I still don't think that would have been a great film, but it could have been fun, impressive, and had an impact. Neither version we got really worked, and yet both have merits.</p><p>The Snyder Cut is just too self-serious and bloated to be good. At the same time, there are too many great moments and incredible images for it to be bad. I really can't fairly rank this against conventional movies - it's an entirely different creature.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>29. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/11/love-hard-2021.html">Love Hard</a></b></p><p>Usually, the subjective approach is mainly a factor on the other end of this list, where the top spot is won by something great that appeals to me personally and beats out other great movies. Love Hard, however, exists on the opposite side of the spectrum: it's being punished because I hate it. And while this isn't great or really even all that good (I think "fine" is a fair assessment), my hatred comes a few directions.</p><p>Put simply, this movie succeeds in doing things I hate and fails in areas I love. The former primarily refers to the style of awkward, uncomfortable humor it employs competently. The latter references its subject matter and choice of pop-culture references, none of which it displays a shred of comprehension about.</p><p>On top of that, the movie is (with apologies to those of you sick of the word) problematic. It comes disturbingly close to embracing a regressive misogynistic ideology that is all too real. If you can overlook that, you might find this enjoyable - again, it's not badly made. But all that was a deal breaker for me. I couldn't stand this thing.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>28. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/father-christmas-is-back-2021.html">Father Christmas is Back</a></b></p><p>Almost certainly the worst movie on this list, Father Christmas is Back is saved from the last spot by virtue of being forgettable. This thing just kind of landed with a thud, like a turd hitting a floor, an image I assure you is in this movie. The experience of watching is an empty experience I took virtually nothing away with. But in this case, that also means I didn't finish the movie with any real animosity. If ever there was damning with faint praise, that would be it: I didn't care about this enough to hate it, so it beats out a better movie. Take from that what you will.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>27. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/a-castle-for-christmas-2021.html">A Castle for Christmas</a></b></p><p>Lacking even a basic understanding of cinematic language, A Castle for Christmas makes me reconsider both my ranking and my assertion that Father Christmas is Back is the worst movie on this list. But while Father Christmas was empty, this is a cinematic vacuum sucking in all feeling. It is, I think, less than empty, offering little indication a script was written before, during, or after production. It was a romance that couldn't manage to put its leads on screen together long enough to provide any sort of justification for a relationship, instead filling its runtime with numerous musical montages that did nothing to move the nonexistent story forward.</p><p>But, hey, some of the music was all right, and Cary Elwes played one of the leads (they even did his hair up like Westley when they wanted him to come off as likeable). So, I guess that's enough to edge out Father Christmas is Back on this ranking. Close call, though.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>26. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/11/home-sweet-home-alone-2021.html">Home Sweet Home Alone</a></b></p><p>This was, of course, bad, but so were Home Alones 2 through 5. Hell, the original isn't all that good, either.</p><p>This iteration complicates the situation by fixing the underlying problems with the first movie (and all subsequent films), at the expense of everything that made any of them at all appealing to anyone. That sacrifice probably would have bothered me more if I'd actually found any of those appealing.</p><p>Even so, the improvements are entirely cerebral - I respect what the script sets out to do on a structural level. Unfortunately, it doesn't manage to be funny or endearing in the process, so I can't say I particularly enjoyed the experience beyond taking a little bit of pleasure out of deconstructing how the franchise was deconstructing itself.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>25. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/04/movie-review-mortal-kombat.html">Mortal Kombat</a></b></p><p>I liked this more than a lot of critics - probably more than half, honestly - but the best I can do is "mediocre." To be fair, there's some really good stuff in the movie. Most of that was also in the trailer, but it still counts. In addition, the first half flirts with crossing into "so bad it's good" territory, which isn't a bad goal for this type of movie. But it becomes less fun as it goes, which is unfortunate.</p><p>To its credit, it never takes itself too seriously, I like the opening, and a lot of the Sub-Zero sequences are great... but that just isn't enough.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>24. Those Who Wish Me Dead</b></p><p>A lot of people have pointed out Those Who Wish Me Dead is basically Cliffhanger in a forest fire, which is accurate but oddly forgets Cliffhanger was Die Hard on a mountain, making this at minimum a second gen knock-off.</p><p>Rating the movie's quality is unusually tricky, because the question I keep running into is "compared to what?" It doesn't really hold its own against, well, the two movies I just mentioned, but... is it supposed to? This was clearly made on a lower budget and was aiming for less excitement and more of an emotional connection. And, in that regard, it sort of kind of works. Maybe?</p><p>In some ways, it's caught in a catch-22: Jolie is great in the lead role, but her very presence keeps raising expectations for both quality and spectacle. Fair or not, the movie can't keep up with its lead.</p><p>That said, there are a handful of impressive choices here. I like that the movie subverts your expectations regarding heroes and action clichés by having Medina Senghore basically come out of left field and turn out to be the actual badass. Sure, Angelina gets her moment, but everyone who underestimated the pregnant lady lived to regret it (albeit briefly).</p><p>But despite some decent swerves, the movie still feels a little too much like a generic '90s action/disaster mashup. Yes, it innovates a bit here and there, but the same can be said for basically any movie from that decade it's emulating. And it doesn't help that the effects frankly fall short of most memorable movies from that era.</p><p>This is certainly fine if it's what you're in the mood for - it's decent enough for what it is - but that's certainly not a ringing endorsement.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>23. Reminiscence</b></p><p>Here's the thing: I'm honestly a sucker for this stuff. I mean, I like science fiction, and I like noir, and when you put them together, I almost always like the result.</p><p>And yet... I did not like this movie.</p><p>Okay, to be fair, I liked the setting. The post-apocalyptic coastal cities were fascinating; at once eerie and beautiful. I found that aspect compelling.<br /></p><p>Unfortunately, the stuff going on in that setting was boring. There were some interesting ideas, but the dialogue was clunky and the voiceover distracting. On top of all that, the editing felt like it was drawing everything out to an agonizing degree. This was hard to sit through. And, again, I generally really like this stuff. Hell, I gave <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2018/11/mute-2018.html">Mute</a> a pass.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>22. <a href="https://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/02/movie-review-flora-ulysses.html">Flora & Ulysses</a></b></p><p>I feel like Disney has a long tradition of making movies that feel like they'd be better imagined as pilots to TV shows, and this falls firmly in that camp. The content comprising this was enjoyable - very enjoyable, in fact - but the overall movie lacked substance. I liked the characters and the jokes, but it felt like whatever story or theme drove the book was lost in adaptation. Every scene feels inspired and entertaining, but it didn't really add up to anything meaningful. You can get away with that in a television series, but movies need more payoff than this delivered.</p><p>Still, the cast and dialogue alone make this worth seeing. It was fun - shame it wasn't good.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>21. Raya and the Last Dragon</b></p><p>There was a period in the late '90s/early '00s when Disney animation seemed intent on constantly sabotaging its own attempts to move in new and interesting directions. Remember Treasure Planet and Atlantis: The Lost Empire? Those were clearly the product of creators eagerly trying to push Disney out of its comfort zone, only to have their efforts watered down by executives demanding anything and everything be crammed into their movies. At least that's my impression based on the finished product - I'm not researching any of this. </p><p>Nor am I interested in researching the behind-the-scenes situation with Raya and the Last Dragon, a similarly beautiful setting and intriguing premise undercut with... well... everything. And I do mean just about everything.</p><p>The core is really neat. There's some wonderful fantasy, along with some exhilarating action. But then there's also a bunch of fandom-referencing anachronistic dialogue. And some comic relief. And the dragons are basically designed to look like the main characters of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (also, the story and theme appear to be lifted from an episode of that show, but let's ignore that for now). And then there's a quartet of side characters who are basically imported from Looney Tunes.</p><p>None of these ideas are inherently bad. The fandom stuff is jarring, but had it been sustained or gone somewhere, it could have potentially made an interesting statement on our assumptions around fantasy tropes and clichés. But they don't sustain it: most of the dialogue is stylized to mimic standard fantasy conventions, so when they start chatting like teens chatting online, it's just confusing. Likewise, the ridiculous comic relief gang consisting of three magic monkeys and a super-powered baby are actually kind of funny if you look at them in isolation, but in the midst of an already overcrowded movie, they're mostly just confusing.</p><p>Like I said before, I haven't taken the time to research whether there's evidence this movie was the result of studio interference, but that's certainly the impression I got watching it. It's a mess of random ideas, conflicting tones, and mismatched styles that has enough genuinely good moments to somewhat redeem itself, but not enough to be more than - or even equal to - the sum of its parts.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>20. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/8-bit-christmas-2021.html">8-Bit Christmas</a></b></p><p>This is one of those movies that manages to be "good enough." It's funny and engaging enough, but it doesn't leave much of an impression. That's not entirely a bad thing - this was made in an attempt to duplicate the inexplicable and unearned success <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2010/12/christmas-story-1983.html">A Christmas Story</a> has enjoyed, so it shouldn't be too surprising it sticks with a similar formula. The goal is to make a movie that's always amusing but never compelling, something you can leave on in the background to entertain the kids.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>19. Jungle Cruise</b></p><p>I'm not really sure what to say about Jungle Cruise, a movie that was much better than it probably should have been but still was basically just fine. Conceptually, it was clearly an attempt to mashup The Mummy and the first Pirates of the Caribbean film - rarely have movies been more upfront as to their influences. To a degree, it was successful, or rather successful enough: it manages to repackage more of the magic from those than I'd have expected. But at the same time, there's a sense of artificiality about the whole thing, like it's being assembled competently, but there's barely an ounce of inspiration in the whole ordeal. It's not just that the movie lacks any real originality, but that's certainly a factor.</p><p>And yet the characters are fun, the world is interesting, and the adventure distracting enough. The movie never really feels good, but it manages to stay entertaining enough not to outstay its welcome. Hardly high praise, but - again - I'm honestly shocked it didn't turn out significantly worse. "Fine" is probably more than we should have hoped for. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>18. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/07/movie-review-black-widow.html">Black Widow</a></b></p><p>In some ways, Black Widow reminded me of Thor: The Dark World, and I don't entirely mean that in a bad way. A lot of people remember The Dark World as the worst entry in the MCU, and... okay, there's a case to be made. But for all its faults, it's also got a lot of great stuff. Hero Loki basically got his start there, and the third act was delightfully absurd.</p><p>Like The Dark World, Black Widow is a tonal mess with an underdeveloped villain, but it also gave us some fantastic new characters, with David Harbour's Red Guardian being the prime example. The opening was a great spy story, and that middle section with the "family" together was an absolute joy.</p><p>But for everything it got right, it stumbled in its attempt to maintain a tone or bring its themes together. I had fun - this is still Marvel, after all - but it's one of the series weaker entries.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>17. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/retfrdighedens-ryttere-riders-of.html">Retfærdighedens Ryttere</a> [Riders of Justice]</b></p><p>More an exercise in existentialism than an action flick, Riders of Justice is thoughtful and surprisingly poignant. It takes an archetype who'd be worshipped in a conventional genre flick and instead makes him genuinely uncomfortable to be around. It's a smart, compelling movie that challenges how we look at action heroes.</p><p>That said, the ending feels off to me. Like, really off. It's not exactly that I dislike it, it just that it doesn't quite align with what came before. And I can't help but think that may be because it was a last-minute addition. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>16. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/09/movie-review-my-little-pony-new.html">My Little Pony: A New Generation</a></b></p><p>The smartest thing A New Generation does is not compete with Friendship is Magic. Tonally, it settles for "conventional CG animated movie", as opposed to "epic fantasy/comedy/superhero cartoon." While this is - in my opinion, at least - less interesting a target, I don't think there was any chance it could instantly match (or even approach) Friendship is Magic on its own turf.</p><p>As a fairly conventional animated movie, this is pretty good. And it retains enough of the whimsy, humor, and fun of its predecessor to be worth watching. On top of all that, the villains are basically Trump supporters, so bonus points for that.</p><p>Also, having Ken Jeong reprise his role as Chang (using virtually the same arc as season 3, no less) was a nice surprise. Not bad for a non-Pixar CG movie.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>15. In the Heights</b></p><p>I mean, it's great. Quite a bit better than its placement on this list would imply, but even if I were aiming for objectivity rather than personal preference, I'd still be at a loss how to rate something like this. Do you consider the musical on its own merits, or just try and judge how well it was adapted for the screen? Do you penalize your rating for areas the two mediums can't possibly bridge?</p><p>I'd be at a disadvantage, anyway, since I never actually saw In the Heights performed. But I can still make out some of the spots where decisions were made to transform the show into a movie. It's always a tough call - which conventions stay, which go, which are treated diegetically, which are imaginary, what should be treated seriously, what's a joke... Err too much towards realism, and you lose the spirit of the material (looking at you, Sweeney Todd); too far the other way, and you're left with something that feels cartoonish (I don't hate Disney's Into the Woods, but I think it falls into this trap).</p><p>In the Heights walks that tightrope, and it makes it look easy. It delivers a world that feels larger than life but still somehow grounded and believable. It's not my favorite movie musical by a longshot, but honestly I think it's one of the best, particularly as an example for how you actually make these work.</p><p>That said, I think there's a limit to what it can do with the material. That's not a slight against the material, mind you - I think this material is great as a stage musical. But stage musicals don't need a strong, central protagonist, while movies do. There's a bit of awkwardness around the show's desire to be about a community and the movie's desire to be about a character. I don't think they made a mistake here - more that they got caught in a catch-22 that came with adapting the play.</p><p>Regardless, the movie's great. Amazing cast, amazing design, amazing direction from [checks notes] the guy who made GI Joe: Retaliation (Jon M. Chu honestly has had one of the weirdest career paths in Hollywood). This one really, really works.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>14. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/11/a-boy-called-christmas-2021.html">A Boy Called Christmas</a></b></p><p>Despite numerous flaws, this won me over with a core that was impressively sweet and honest. On top of that, this featured some genuinely beautiful images and effects (the shadow story in particular stuck with me). I really enjoyed this, despite a weak narrative and some major tonal issues.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>13. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/04/movie-review-godzilla-vs-kong.html">Godzilla vs. Kong</a></b></p><p>Compared to most showdowns of this kind, Godzilla vs. Kong is fairly streamlined. It's less interested in why the title monsters are fighting than in the sheer spectacle of the showdown. This is neither a good nor bad strategy on its own: it just means the movie will sink or swim on the quality of that spectacle. And fortunately this one delivers. It looks awesome, so it doesn't really matter that Godzilla blasting a hole to the center of the Earth makes, for countless reasons, absolutely no goddamn sense. Nor does it matter that the villains are able to upload an energy signature that instantly grants them unlimited power.</p><p>You can nitpick this to your heart's content, but it won't change the fact the experience of watching this was a ton of fun.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>12. Encanto</b></p><p>There's a lot to love here, but I really want to highlight just how <i>not Disney </i>this Disney animated flick is. First, it's a fantasy where the stakes are essentially limited to one family. Not even their lives: this is really about whether or not they lose their home. I mean, really the stakes have more to do with their emotional health and relationships, but still: no kingdoms hinged on the outcome, the fate of the world isn't being decided, the balance of nature isn't at risk... just a family drama. How refreshing.</p><p>Likewise, I think this was the first Disney animated movie with a female protagonist in decades which wasn't about the fact it wasn't about her being a princess who falls in love. This wasn't following the Disney formula, but it wasn't subverting it, either. It was its own thing. What an incredible concept.</p><p>And its own thing was pretty damn good. It's sweet, with a great soundtrack and lovely animation. So. Why isn't this higher?</p><p>Well, first of all, this is pretty high on the list as it is. But what I feel is missing is a bit more surprise. The movie establishes its premise pretty fast, and the rest of the film plays out more or less as expected. The themes, in particular, are pretty clear in the first fifteen minutes, and the movie doesn't throw many curveballs at us.</p><p>Still, a really good movie, just not as memorable as I'd have liked.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>11. Luca</b></p><p>Luca is lovely, both visually and as a story. It isn't a grand epic or even a small story told with the weight of a grand epic (Pixar loves those). Instead, it's a simple coming of age story with hints of romance. It's funny, sweet, and effective. I liked this one a lot. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>10. Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings</b></p><p>The family drama stuff was fine but kind of by-the-numbers. The epic fantasy sequences are solid - I enjoyed them quite a bit, largely thanks to how weird they were allowed to get - but they always felt a bit CG heavy. The action in general was really good.</p><p>In short, no major complaints, but nothing to justify placing this anywhere near this high on the list. Until, that is...</p><p>It's the stuff with Shang-Chi and Katy. Particularly them at the end. It was just an absolute joy seeing how little becoming superheroes really changes them. Give me a damn Disney+ show that's just Simu Liu and Awkwafina hanging out at karaoke bars when they should be preparing for battles where the fate of the multiverse hangs in the balance. I'd watch the hell out of that.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>9. <a href="https://www.mainliningchristmas.com/2021/12/the-green-knight-2021.html">The Green Knight</a></b></p><p>There's a lot that I could say about The Green Knight (hell, there's a lot I've already said), but the truth is it's less the thematic complexity than the visual style that appeals to me most. This movie is just gorgeous to look at.</p><p>And on top of that, yeah, it's Arthurian. God I love those legends. And despite countless tries, it's been four decades since the last good adaptation came out. Bonus points there, as well.<br /></p><p>The reason it's not higher is mainly because I find aspects frustrating. To be fair, I'm pretty certain those aspects are intended to be frustrating. I get the ending, appreciate why it's clever, and I respect the choice. It works for me intellectually but not emotionally, if that makes sense.</p><p>Well, honestly, it still works for me emotionally, just not enough to bump it into the top tier. I have a feeling I might find myself regretting that in the future. This feels like one of those movies I might wind up revisiting a lot, particularly because it's a Christmas story.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>8. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/12/movie-review-matrix-resurrections.html">The Matrix Resurrections</a></b></p><p>Easily my favorite installment in the franchise, Resurrections approaches its subject and world with a playful sense of glee missing from the originals. It's weird, funny, and experimental in ways you'd never expect from a film of this scale. It's not at all unusual for nostalgic reboots to be about the relationship between the originals and the fans (the Disney Star Wars, for example, goes this route), but I don't think I've ever seen a movie be this honest about where it comes from and where it wants to go.</p><p>More than that, this movie is wish fulfillment. It's the cinematic equivalent of its creator playing with her toys and daring audiences to whine about it. I know that's upsetting some people, but I found the experience refreshing and genuinely joyful.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>7. Cruella</b></p><p>Yeah. I think it is this high.</p><p>Some of this might be expectations - I really didn't expect much out of this - and some it is that this particular blend of stylized, self-aware quirky character study just works for me. The movie definitely has problems, starting with the much-maligned death of Cruella's mother and continuing through to the unwelcome post-credit sequence.</p><p>But for all its faults, this was also an unapologetic supervillain period story. In short, this is a Disnified spin on Joker, which it turns out would have been a lot better that way. What Cruella understands that Joker doesn't is that supervillains should be, well, fun. And this is ridiculously fun. A lot of the credit goes to Stone, who sells the lead and carries the movie. But it's also worth noting the dialogue is actually solid for its genre.</p><p>The real surprise, though, is that the movie isn't interested in moralizing. Sure, it's got lines it won't cross, but despite ostensibly being a kid's movie, it never tries to tell the audience it's wrong to steal or seek revenge or torment one's enemies. Cruella is a criminal, and the movie celebrates that, freeing the movie up to have fun with her schemes. I could have done without the obligatory "learn the true meaning of family and friendship" stuff, but why quibble?</p><p>This is easily my second favorite Disney live-action remake after Jungle Book. I'm glad I gave it a chance.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>6. The Mitchells Vs. The Machines</b></p><p>I'd say this one caught me off guard, but the truth is by the time I got around to watching it, I'd heard it was pretty damn awesome. Fortunately, knowing it was going to be great spoiled absolutely nothing, and I still had a blast. The jokes were hilarious, the drama was touching, and the animation was delightfully bonkers. This was great.</p><p>In fact, it was so great, it almost made a run for the top of my list. What holds it back a bit are a few sequences (mainly action beats) where the movie went for slapstick when I wanted something else. This is, of course, a minor quibble, and a subjective one at that. But as I keep pointing out, this is a subjective list.</p><p>Overall, I loved this movie. The characters were completely ridiculous and utterly absurd, and I still cared about them and - in a weird way - they felt real to me. That's a hell of an accomplishment.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>5. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/08/movie-review-suicide-squad.html">The Suicide Squad</a></b></p><p>This was a weird, convoluted movie. Structurally, it was far more similar to the first Suicide Squad movie than I was expecting, between the flashbacks, cutaways, and use of music. Obviously, though, it was far superior. The humor, emotion, and thematic core were among the best we've seen in the genre.</p><p>I rewatched this several times, and the characters keep growing on me. The movie is a lot of fun, and also surprisingly thoughtful. At times, it can become downright poetic: the flashback with Ratcatcher almost feels like a fairytale.</p><p>I really like this one.</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>4. Hilda and the Mountain King</b></p><p>Okay, this one is cheating. I don't I'm cheating by putting it here - I mean the movie is cheating by using unfair tactics to climb its way this high, despite being significantly less expensive. Hilda and the Mountain King is a Netflix movie that concludes a storyline running through the animated series, Hilda. The movie is done in the same animation style with the same voice cast.</p><p>Which... okay, first of all, none of that's a bad thing. The animation in the series, while simplistic compared to big budget movies, is gorgeous and evocative. The cast is great, and the writing is on par with the best in the medium. The show is just amazing.</p><p>The "cheating" part comes from the fact the movie requires the series to work. It's a direct continuation to a cliffhanger at the end of season 2, and the character arcs all build on established storylines. This isn't a standalone movie in any sense - it's the next chapter. Possibly the final chapter: I'm a little unclear on whether they're making more or not.<br /></p><p>Basically, this movie is standing on the shoulders of the series, and I'm effectively reacting to it as if it's all one emotional journey. Is that fair? Who gives a crap? Hilda is amazing, and this movie is a satisfying finale. Go watch it all immediately.<b> </b></p><p><br /></p><p><b>3. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/11/movie-review-harder-they-fall.html">The Harder They Fall</a></b></p><p>This is probably the closest thing to a flawless film I saw this year. Every element, every choice, every shot, and every edit just felt perfect, resulting in one of the most fun pieces of entertainment I've encountered in a long time.</p><p>The only reason this isn't higher is that - by necessity - the movie's intellectual themes and emotional themes don't entirely work together. As I said in my review, I don't consider this a flaw: on the contrary, it's a major part of the reason I think this movie is brilliant. But it does hold back my enjoyment a hair. If this were a less impressive year, I don't think that would be enough, but honestly 2021 was about as close to a 4 or 5 way tie as this gets.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>2. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/10/movie-review-dune-part-1.html">Dune, Part 1</a></b></p><p>Should this be a spot higher? Maybe. It was so close. I loved every minute of this movie. It was one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, and I don't doubt for a second it would be my #1 pick for the year if I'd seen it in an IMAX theater, as it was intended.</p><p>But I didn't see it that way, and - honestly - I kind of resent the implication that I should have to. Even without the pandemic, I'm busy. I've got a young kid, and free time is a rare luxury. I'd have loved to see this on a big screen, but it wasn't going to happen this year.</p><p>If I was rating this on a best to worst scale... honestly, I think that would have been harder, because I'd have to consider whether cutting a narrative in half at a fairly arbitrary point is an objective flaw. I didn't mind that - I just wanted so see some sandworms and space ships in a movie where the dialogue and direction didn't distract from the beauty. And damn did this overdeliver on that promise. It was just a joy to watch.</p><p>But was it my favorite movie of the year? Not quite. It might have been my favorite cinematic experience, but it's not the one I look back on with the widest grin. Close call, though. Really damn close. </p><p><br /></p><p><b>1. <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2021/05/movie-review-shadow-in-cloud.html">Shadow in the Cloud</a></b></p><p>This movie shouldn't work.</p><p>It doesn't have the budget to pull of its effects, the premise is significantly more complex than it has to be, there are multiple major tonal shifts... I have no idea how this got made.</p><p>But I'm so glad it did. The sheer audacity of Roseanne Liang's directing, coupled with some phenomenal acting from Chloë Grace Moretz, just sell the hell out of its outlandish, gonzo ideas and set-pieces. The movie's main action sequence looks completely unrealistic - they clearly didn't have the money to match their ambitions - and I almost think that helps it. Modern big-budget productions would have relied on visual effects instead of acting and editing. Because this couldn't trust its effects to wow audiences, it had to find other solutions. Or maybe Liang and Moretz are just that good.</p><p>Shadow in the Cloud isn't afraid to be weird. It's audacious and bizarre on a level you don't see often enough. I've seen the whole thing at least four times already, and I've lost track of the number of times I've rewatched the last act. It's a movie with something to say - something important to say, no less - but honestly what keeps pulling me back is how much fun the ending is. The energy is just off the charts, and I find the resolution about as satisfying as any I've ever encountered in this genre. I know a lot of more hardcore horror fans disagree, but I just love it.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Conclusion</b></p><p>I honestly think this was a pretty good year for movies and TV shows. Also, literally nothing else. Entertainment was good, the world has just been abysmal. Between the seemingly endless line of nightmare variants consistently popping up the minute it feels like things might be improving, the barrage of environmental disasters, and the ongoing concern for the stability of US democracy, things kind of suck.</p><p>But, hey, WandaVision was pretty rad, and I really liked a bunch of those movies. So... I guess we should take the rare win where we can get it. Here's hoping we continue seeing good movies in 2022.</p><p>Also, let's hope some of that other shit gets better, because I am really, really tired.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-45410470946471312992021-12-26T14:45:00.001-08:002021-12-26T14:49:29.261-08:00Movie Review: The Matrix Resurrections<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjvLP2KKv1dMna3zYov8B4tjd0oeJAshsHkL46ANQTO6I1qKCVRPYBQ72Bg3qCZaOGgz8_pTeRYyby43xo0_PRtfGznOaAXH3dCtEbf30rcV1YjDZIWqRqOh-M3ItphXFI5sMwvslYDGwhigUlVeW9w0XGnWhxtDvUlzjKhLBRUzmhj68bnM-r8ziTRcQ=s4032" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjvLP2KKv1dMna3zYov8B4tjd0oeJAshsHkL46ANQTO6I1qKCVRPYBQ72Bg3qCZaOGgz8_pTeRYyby43xo0_PRtfGznOaAXH3dCtEbf30rcV1YjDZIWqRqOh-M3ItphXFI5sMwvslYDGwhigUlVeW9w0XGnWhxtDvUlzjKhLBRUzmhj68bnM-r8ziTRcQ=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p>In March of 1999, I was just wrapping up my first year at college. I went to a school that didn't have majors, but for all intents and purposes I was studying philosophy. I was also a huge fan of genre, including science-fiction. With all that background, you'd probably assume I loved The Matrix. Well... no, not really.</p><p>I saw it at a packed midnight showing, and when the movie ended, I remember thinking, "That's it?" I'd thought the action was good (though it didn't leave me in awe, the way it did so many in my generation). And I thought the characters were fine and all, but the underlying ideas kind of struck me as simplistic. Fair or not, the basic story boils down to a rehash of Plato's Cave Allegory, an idea that struck me as an interesting place to start, but a bit cliché for a central twist.</p><p>Basically, The Matrix wasn't weird or imaginative enough for me. It was a solid adventure flick, but - at least as far as my brain could discern - not much more. I honestly couldn't understand at the time why it was considered as groundbreaking as it was.</p><p>I'll admit I was a bit snobbish. And if I could go back in time and inform myself that the philosophy 101 stuff <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-53692435">wasn't everything going on</a>, I'd do so.</p><p>The point is, I never really loved The Matrix, and I thought less of the sequels. The second and third movies actually checked off the boxes I wanted in terms of philosophical depth and a more developed world, but the pacing just didn't work for me. My opinion of those was always that they were really good as a philosophy dissertation and really bad as movies.</p><p>In short, I never loved any movie in this series.</p><p>Until now.</p><p>Resurrections, the fourth installment in the series, is a delight. I know it's divisive as hell, and it's easy to see why (more on that in a moment), but it finally gives me what I've always wanted out of the series: real, honest-to-god weirdness delivered in an intelligent manner.</p><p>I feel like I should drop a spoiler warning here. I'm not exactly going to go into the plot of this thing, but I think any discussion about the experience of seeing Resurrections is going to require some details and aspects that aren't apparent from the marketing. There's a real chance you'll be better off learning about these things before watching, though I'm really glad I went in blind.</p><p>Last chance if anyone wants to jump ship, pay for a month of HBO Max, and watch it now.</p><p>All right then. Let's discuss this batshit crazy ode to joy and love. Because, first and foremost, that's what it is. The original was a sort of dark, modern folktale that ended on an ambiguously hopeful note. The sequels went even darker, trying to show that sacrifice was necessary to enact change. This one...</p><p>It's a fairytale. When I say that word, I don't mean it in a dark sense, either. This is literally, unapologetically, completely a fairytale set in the world of the Matrix. It's closer to Jupiter Ascending than to the other Matrix films.</p><p>It looks back on the original films honestly, celebrating what made them meaningful to many, while at the same time critiquing elements that inadvertently empowered hate groups. It also rejects the cynicism that lay at the heart of the originals, choosing instead to embrace hope, love, and forgiveness.</p><p>To appreciate the degree to which Lana Wachowski has transformed the franchise, I think it helps to look at the number of named characters killed over the course of the movie. I don't mean characters who died between Revolutions and Resurrections (of which there are several) but the number who actually die in this installment.<br /></p><p>The number is zero. No one dies. Not one major character - or minor one, for that matter - is killed (unless I'm forgetting something). Some almost die, but the importance of protecting each other is given a higher priority this time around. Meanwhile, vengeance isn't. This is a rejection of grim, bleak storytelling.</p><p>This movie has a sense of humor and a love for the bizarre. The fourth wall becomes a running joke, and the movie delights in playing with the audience's relationship and understanding of the franchise. I'm sure some viewers will interpret all this as a joke at the expense of the franchise. And, to be fair, it kind of is - the movie doesn't take itself all that seriously. This is, at its core, a self-referential film exploring the very nature of returning to a franchise decades later. It essentially shrugs off concerns of fan service by refusing to be anything but. Only in this case, the fan being catered to is the co-creator of the franchise.</p><p>This is the story Lana wants to tell for the sheer joy of telling it. These are her toys, and she's going to play with them the way she wants to. And it's a genuine pleasure to watch her having so much fun.</p><p>The movie is far from perfect, of course. The second act drags a bit, and there really weren't any action beats delivering iconic, awesome moments like we got in the original (though the movie kind of addresses that by poking fun at the assumption there should be).</p><p>But those are minor complaints. I had a lot of fun watching this, and - as long as you set aside any expectation this will or even should try and recreate the feel or flavor of the original - I think you might, as well.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-55971969416531964532021-11-05T20:13:00.001-07:002021-11-05T20:13:21.567-07:00Movie Review: The Harder They Fall<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizMaKaJzN-Xvc_HzCiS44578irPCBU2NDlk8oIXjJTzevb2E_B2mZPNBR9pbgRYzQz9rO8kWgfSTWrD3rcm2WUSU8WHwQ3s6hrowJBbOrD5OHv9ylASmWhoxFK351ohmOrSkrh6HhzE__4/s4032/PXL_20211106_030404416.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizMaKaJzN-Xvc_HzCiS44578irPCBU2NDlk8oIXjJTzevb2E_B2mZPNBR9pbgRYzQz9rO8kWgfSTWrD3rcm2WUSU8WHwQ3s6hrowJBbOrD5OHv9ylASmWhoxFK351ohmOrSkrh6HhzE__4/s320/PXL_20211106_030404416.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>The Harder They Fall is an intellectual film that explores and contextualizes the history of its genre, but it's also just fucking fun as all hell to watch. It's like someone made one of the year's best popcorn flicks and fused it at a molecular level with a graduate-level lecture on film history, somehow without sacrificing one iota of either. And that... it's just... I'm kind of speechless.</p><p>Let's start with the brainy stuff. The movie is, obviously, a western. Not a parody of westerns: it's wholly operating within the rules of that genre. I think this is key to understanding The Harder They Fall: it's not breaking or bending those rules but rather exploiting loopholes.</p><p>Westerns have always prioritized myth over reality, they've never worried about anachronisms, and they've always been maybe a quarter step away from being musicals. These elements are intrinsic to the genre. The Harder They Fall just tweaks some of the conventions to generate something a little more modern.</p><p>I don't mean "modern" in a sense of differentiating this from history - again, westerns aren't set in the actual historical west anymore than Disney fairytales are set in the historical middle ages. When I say this movie modernizes the western, I mean it's what the western would (or at least should) have evolved into if the genre had never gone out of fashion. If they'd remained as popular for the past forty years as they'd been in the previous forty and had been able to continue innovating, I think this is what they'd have grown into as the genre matured. </p><p>All of which is interesting but almost besides the point, because - as I said at the start - this thing is just delightful. It's got the dialogue of a Marvel film (the really good ones, I mean), top-notch action, as much style as anything I've seen this year, a hell of a cast, and a great soundtrack tying it all together. The movie is hilarious and engaging. Every character in it is likeable, including the antagonists. It's just a wonderful experience, start to finish.</p><p>All of this does come with a bit of a price, however. Not a steep price, but still one I feel I should mention. The experience works as a whole, but I'm not sure it actually works <i>better</i> than the sum of its parts. To be clear, this isn't a complaint. The movie delivers everything it promises and then some. And, at the risk of contradicting myself, it does amount to something larger - that's what the first part of this review was about.</p><p>The point of the movie is that history is more than the actions of a handful of straight, white men, and if westerns are mythologized history, said mythology must extend beyond that limited scope. There's nothing intrinsic to the western genre that should limit it to white people - in fact, expanding both the scope of the characters the genre is exploring and the scope of music and culture it incorporates has the potential to revitalize that genre. The movie effectively makes that argument simply by existing and being <b>that good</b>.</p><p>It's a hell of an intellectual accomplishment coupled with a hell of an entertaining piece of art, but all that doesn't leave much room for an emotional core. That's not to say the movie lacks emotion altogether; the emotional beats are solid. But they're solid in the way really good blockbusters are solid: this movie is a bit formulaic. It kind of has to be - it's operating within the blueprint of the genre to demonstrate how different the end product feels when the style is updated and the characters aren't photocopies of John Wayne or Clint Eastwood. If they'd changed up the formula too much, they'd risk this being less of a western, which would diminish the point.</p><p>That does mean sacrificing a bit of emotional resonance, but the trade-off is more than worth it. This thing is easily one of the most intriguing and enjoyable genre films of the year. If you're paying for a Netflix subscription, you owe it to yourself to watch this.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-7642494440349911042021-10-23T22:23:00.001-07:002021-10-23T22:27:37.533-07:00Movie Review: Dune Part 1<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLYuh_E17HwZCJ4lSh2X7memiJOh22psuBzsO9ietKyH5tNElebOq137awBggIKEvUhF9hJhMSdc_1v6O2C4_JYSphgs_wTs6TwA5UxxgYQK2MVcTViC0n4hEyv0OYljqGZ6rbglK71j88/s4032/PXL_20211024_020930075.MP.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLYuh_E17HwZCJ4lSh2X7memiJOh22psuBzsO9ietKyH5tNElebOq137awBggIKEvUhF9hJhMSdc_1v6O2C4_JYSphgs_wTs6TwA5UxxgYQK2MVcTViC0n4hEyv0OYljqGZ6rbglK71j88/s320/PXL_20211024_020930075.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div><br /></div>I'm at a bit of a loss for things to say about Dune that aren't evident from a combination of the trailer and the knowledge it's directed by Denis Villeneuve. This is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the movie (or at least the first half of the movie) you'd expect to get if the director of <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2017/10/movie-review-blade-runner-2049.html">Blade Runner 2049</a> took a stab at Dune. Personally, that's exactly what I wanted out of this. But, as was the case with 2049, your mileage could easily vary.<div><br /></div><div>Once again, we're left with less a movie than an experience, even more so because it's only a partial adaptation of the source material. There's a story and characters, but all it all feels secondary to the world. That's not to say the characters are at all bad - I think they're well above par for this genre - but they almost don't matter. Same goes for the plot: it all feels like the rail in an amusement park ride. Every character and story beat is an opportunity to explore the setting or hint at the depth of the backstory. It provides direction and momentum, but really we're here for the backdrop.</div><div><br /></div><div>If that sounds like a chore, it probably will be, but...</div><div><br /></div><div>God, what a world. Very few movies are this successful at pulling you in, and even fewer come close to offering you anything this awe-inspiring. The scale is simply magnificent. Every detail feels right in a way that comes off as organic. Nothing feels artificial or out of place - it's incredible to see and hear.</div><div><br /></div><div>All of that's true of Blade Runner 2049, as well, though by its nature that story felt smaller and more personal, while this delivers something epic in scope. So far, 2049 edges this out for me, though we'll have to wait for part 2 to see if that holds.</div><div><br /></div><div>Assuming, of course, part 2 ever materializes. I know Warner Bros has all but promised to make it, but I didn't trust them before they were sold; now there are no doubt more voices in the room. I certainly hope we get the second half of the story, but even if we don't this is still wonderous. A sequel would resolve the plot, but - again - that's a secondary consideration. A conclusion would be icing; we already got the cake.</div><div><br /></div><div>The cast is fantastic, though it's a bit distracting spotting actor after actor from existing franchises. Almost everyone with any screen time is instantly recognizable from Star Wars, the MCU, the DC Universe, Mission: Impossible, and so on. I almost feel like they need to cast one of the stars from Fast & the Furious to check off the last box.</div><div><br /></div><div>It's also worth noting the ending feels small, partially because it's not really an ending at all and partly because the last fight in the movie is relatively minor. Again, this isn't an issue for me - I'm more than happy to follow along whatever path they want to take, so long as the scenery is nice enough - but I can't dispute anyone calling it anticlimactic.</div><div><br /></div><div>Personally, I didn't have any serious issues with any of it - to me, it's virtually perfect (and I've never even read the source material). But exploring alien worlds is my bread and butter, and Dune delivers that as well or better than any movie ever has. I know that's not what everyone's after. If you want a story or a light adventure or a love story or anything other than what feels like a $160 million pilot to a TV show, you might find this alienating in a bad way.</div><div><br /></div><div>I found it alienating in the best way possible - it brought me to an alien world. It let me touch me the sand and breathe in the spice. Even if there isn't a part 2, I'm grateful for the experience.</div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-29187197735728998692021-09-28T20:13:00.000-07:002021-09-28T20:13:17.034-07:00Movie Review: My Little Pony: A New Generation<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglJNKX_ICTaRTR_xt15fHsneVWil5C7WjdD1ipp_zQPT_izPPWOnzfE5f3JbNe1VMlN1Q8sY_jLZJRZyCsmQ6DgXSMgCjmfD_IM-Z_wX_bddKWuGLKugdP6iSey6pzWbDUCj5ZHwqPz_ya/s3911/PXL_20210929_030559923.MP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1407" data-original-width="3911" height="115" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglJNKX_ICTaRTR_xt15fHsneVWil5C7WjdD1ipp_zQPT_izPPWOnzfE5f3JbNe1VMlN1Q8sY_jLZJRZyCsmQ6DgXSMgCjmfD_IM-Z_wX_bddKWuGLKugdP6iSey6pzWbDUCj5ZHwqPz_ya/s320/PXL_20210929_030559923.MP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p>It feels like it's been longer, but <a href="http://welcometothemiddleroom.blogspot.com/2017/10/movie-review-my-little-pony-movie.html">My Little Pony: The Movie</a> came out four years ago. It says a lot about the state of the industry that it was the 2D tie-in that made it into theaters, while the more professional-looking CG installment wound up on Netflix. That's not intended as a slight against the 2017 movie - I liked it quite a bit - but I can't imagine anyone comparing the two and concluding that one was "more theatrical."</p><p>A little background for those of you who don't follow nerd stuff: the 2017 movie functioned as an extension of the television series, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. That series recently wrapped up its tenth and final season, which is an astonishing run in kid's media. Without going into too much detail, the series' success upended entrenched ideas about the value of animation aimed at a female audience, to say nothing of the impact it had on studios' willingness to gamble on female showrunners. Sadly, it also became a trailblazer in accidentally cultivating a toxic fanbase. The "Brony" thing may have started cute, but it sure as hell didn't stay that way.</p><p>Regardless, A New Generation represents a fairly ambitious attempt to reboot the franchise with new characters. There's a brief intro sequence tying this to the last iteration, though it's a tad ambiguous on whether Friendship is Magic should be regarded as a precursor or as myths that survived about that era. Either way, that's all the distant past.</p><p>Compared with Friendship is Magic, A New Generation is far more grounded. Part of this is due to the story, which is built around a generic "magic has left the world" premise, but even beyond that everything is significantly smaller in scope. The threats are political, rather than existential, and the power levels are more in line with other animated films, as opposed to the superheroics of Friendship is Magic.</p><p>Those "political threats" aren't subtle, either: this is My Little Pony for a divided world. The dangers are fear, xenophobia, and lies, and it's hard not to draw parallels between the villain and the guy we just tossed out of the White House. To be fair, that character's arc also works as a reference to season 3 of Community (they hired Ken Jeong for a reason, after all).</p><p>Of course, this is all going to go over the heads of the movie's target demographic. I assume the animation will keep them happy, though. This is more or less on par visually with most other non-Pixar CG films, which is to say it looks good, but isn't a visual masterpiece or anything. Same goes for the musical numbers: they're solid pop numbers that do the trick.</p><p>The humor mostly works, too, both for kids and adults. They maintained the tradition of interspersing references grown-ups will pick up on but kids will miss (the Community connection being one example).</p><p>Overall, I enjoyed this. It's cute, fun, and entertaining. I do think there was at least one plot point they could have smoothed over towards the end (they repeat a story beat they could probably have streamlined), but that's a minor quibble. Likewise, it's worth noting I found this effective and at times impressive, but not particularly moving. This is pretty good - it's not great or anything.</p><p>Lastly, I want to mention one aspect I find a little disheartening. Looking over the team of directors and producers driving this incarnation, it looks like the majority are men. Friendship is Magic was headed by women, and - while the new team did solid work - I think it's a misstep to move backwards on that front.</p><p>At any rate, if you've got Netflix, you've already got access to this. If you're a fan of the last show, this is worth a watch. And if you've got a kid the right age, they'll probably love it.</p>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8395788744680007876.post-60615937798009675442021-08-08T12:57:00.001-07:002021-08-08T12:57:10.950-07:00Movie Review: The Suicide Squad<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsb1LkhqRlZGHWYRrt-uPjzTOnJKbYI0siFB4HS5YbWyNsqqedo-YytbIPS93004xT7LuStSZmwfLc4SHrUseMsBOAT1cut9-UefexBo2A2FqwlgyNX34O0CDrrneHyB6mZv94Vwp2raUz/s3160/PXL_20210808_195319385.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2686" data-original-width="3160" height="272" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsb1LkhqRlZGHWYRrt-uPjzTOnJKbYI0siFB4HS5YbWyNsqqedo-YytbIPS93004xT7LuStSZmwfLc4SHrUseMsBOAT1cut9-UefexBo2A2FqwlgyNX34O0CDrrneHyB6mZv94Vwp2raUz/s320/PXL_20210808_195319385.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>Watching The Suicide Squad feels a lot like reading an issue of a comic entrenched in continuity you know nothing about. For better or worse (mostly better, but not entirely), this comes off as being part of something much, much larger than what's onscreen. Only that "larger thing" doesn't actually exist, so we're left to fend for ourselves. In other words, if there's a problem with The Suicide Squad (and, to be clear, that's a big IF), that problem is the DCEU. Because the movie is framed as a deviation from the norm, it's a bit awkward there's no real "norm" for it to deviate from. The last seven movies in this franchise are Justice League, Aquaman, Shazam, Birds of Prey, Wonder Woman 1984, Justice League again, and now this: if everything is weird, is anything? And more importantly, is that even an issue?</div><div><br /></div><div>It's certainly a double-edged sword. The DCEU's lack of cohesion makes it more conducive to experimentation than the relatively focused MCU, but it also robs its successes of the contrast that contextualized the Guardians of the Galaxy movies. The Suicide Squad feels like it should also be interesting as part of its franchise, in addition to as its own story.</div><div><br /></div><div>But since it's got to stand on its own merits, it's fortunate it's got merits to spare. The movie is overflowing with fascinating characters, thoughtful dialogue, and absurd action. It works simultaneously as a war story, a comedy, a satire, and - lest we forget - a superhero flick.</div><div><br /></div><div>To be clear, there's a lot going on here. This is a movie that revels in gratuitous violence one moment, only to shift to a poignant philosophical or political point the next. When it's not ripping off heads, it's sweet, heartfelt, and at times shockingly beautiful. It cares deeply about its characters, even if the world they inhabit doesn't. The unapologetic fantasy elements in the trailers obscure the fact that this movie has a great deal to say about very real foreign policy.</div><div><br /></div><div>Depending on your point-of-view, I think you could accurately describe the film as a whole as layered or patchwork. The themes resonate with the characters and their stories, but at the same time there are so many flashbacks, cutaways, and asides, it feels a little like you're being tricked into believing the plot is more complicated than it really is. This is more intended as an observation than a complaint: I think the style adds a great deal to the movie.</div><div><br /></div><div>The characters are more or less universally wonderful. I felt a little shortchanged by several not getting enough screen time, but if you asked me for something to cut to free up space, I'd be at a loss. This definitely leaves you wanting more, but that's hardly a problem. The movie isn't above killing off minor characters for laughs, but when it wants you to feel a loss, it succeeds. Without giving too much away, I'll say it gave the character I'd least expect to care about a final line that stopped me in my tracks. And, to be clear, I'm the kind of person who expects to care about talking raccoons, tree men, and walking sharks. When I say this movie pulls out a surprise twist on a character's inner life and motives, trust it's something truly unexpected.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is a great movie. Is it my favorite James Gunn movie? Nah, that's still Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 2. It's not quite my favorite DCEU movie, either, though it's somewhere in the top tier alongside Wonder Woman, Birds of Prey, and Shazam. This is worth seeing, assuming you're not easily grossed out. For the record, I'm not big fan of gore, and nothing in this bothered me too much (and almost everything that came close was in the first ten minutes).</div><div><br /></div><div>One last note I feel needs to be acknowledged: I watched Suicide Squad the only way that made sense to me, given the fact we're in a pandemic, and I've got a young child - on HBO Max. There is a very real possibility that impacted my reaction to the movie, so take that how you will.</div>Erin Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00894781339191061541noreply@blogger.com0