I did watch Nope. Loved it.
A much more terrifying film than I expected going in.

kuribo-04 wrote:I did watch Nope. Loved it.
A much more terrifying film than I expected going in.

According to the production notes for the film, this final reveal owes itself to the 1995 mecha anime "Neon Genesis Evangelion," a series often attributed as one of the most influential of all time and one that helped to spur international interest in anime. 

The "hyper minimalism" and "biomechanical design flair" of the otherworldly entities known in "Evangelion" as "Angels" were directly cited as one of the influences behind Jean Jacket's design — and it is extremely obvious and welcome.

https://www.slashfilm.com/940351/this-i ... n-in-nope/

I'd wager the director most likely found out about Eva after Netflix. So we're already seeing the effect of NGE's achieving a more mainstream status in the West.

FelipeFritschF wrote:I'd wager the director most likely found out about Eva after Netflix. So we're already seeing the effect of NGE's achieving a more mainstream status in the West.

Kinda doubt Jordan Peele, the guy who was approached to direct a live action AKIRA in 2017 and turned it down because it was one of his favorite childhood movies and he'd prefer doing original films instead, had never seen Evangelion before Netflix. You certainly don't spend two years of your life making a film with a third act heavily inspired by something you "just saw last night on Netflix". If asked I guarantee Peele has been a fan of Evangelion since the 2000s.

Evangelion is not this little unheard of title that Netflix saved from obscurity.

Anime has been popular, or at least readily present, in US pop culture for 30+ years now? Filmmakers who are in their 30s, 40s and even 50s now grew up when Sailor Moon, DragonBall Z, Gundam Wing and other shows were making waves on TV. Anime is an influence for professional filmmakers now.

Peele is in his early 40s. Like anyone else in that age group, if he engaged regularly with pop culture - which he clearly has - then he's seen his fair share of anime.

https://www.dazeddigital.com/film-tv/article/56720/1/jordan-peele-nope-interview

Two specific inspirations Peele is willing to name are Akira and Neon Genesis Evangelion.

“Those two are the best [of anime] in my mind,” he says. “Anime and manga have a different sense of character, a different sense of world-building, a different sense of revealing and twists. I’m very inspired by that storytelling.” Did NGE influence the spaceship? “I will say… y… y… y…” He pauses, unable to think of a way to avoid the question, then laughs. “Yes, absolutely. The Angels of Evangelion are truly some of the best creature designs of all time. It’s very important for me to create something very unique as well, but I went into it with this knowledge that there’s a minimalist spectacle that we haven’t seen photographically in film.”

I know what you mean, you're right, but you don't need to tell me that, as I often make that point to the many Western fans who do believe Eva is obscure. What I mean is that it had become less easily available over the years as it was absent from the most popular means of distribution for well over 10 years. I have known a lot of newer fans who have indeed been into anime since say around 2015 and didn't get into Eva until Netflix gave them that opportunity. Admittedly, I don't know about Peele specifically, but I don't mean just him. I recall in 2009 Paul W. S. Anderson mentioned Eva, and you know, it shouldn't be such a big and surprising thing, but it was. He also kinda talks about it as a hidden gem, and oddity.

Gendo'sPapa wrote:Anime has been popular, or at least readily present, in US pop culture for 30+ years now? Filmmakers who are in their 30s, 40s and even 50s now grew up when Sailor Moon, DragonBall Z, Gundam Wing and other shows were making waves on TV. Anime is an influence for professional filmmakers now.

Not nearly as much as it is in the rest of the Western world, though. France and Italy and Germany and Iberia get official translations of supplementary material, merch, spin-off manga and even games to a much higher degree than the US does. They have open public channels displaying anime, and have had decades earlier, with far more professional localization industries and such. DBZ was already a mainstream thing for over a decade when ADV was doing a largely unprofessional adaptation of Eva with quality and accuracy that would have been unacceptable in any other Western country (including Latin America), producing tons of myths and misconceptions we've had to deal with for 20 years, also until Netflix and its Khara-mandated new translation corrected them, to the ire of the (mostly uniquely Anglo phenomenon) ADV dub loyalists. Evageeks itself has as advantage due to English being lingua franca so this is also the "International" hub for Western Eva fans, but even so I'm sure you've noticed the disproportionate amount of non-Anglophone users here since day one.

So sure enough while I understand your point, I wouldn't take this as a given at all. Even now Anime is far more of a niche subculture in the US/UK than it is in many other cultures. Australia is notably an exception, but it is a much smaller market. Something like Eva isn't this specific anime sub-genre thingy elsewhere, it's another cartoon people grow up with.

Dark Glasses (2022):

Is it Dario Argento's return to form? Well, a formidable attempt at least, and it must be commended for trying to imbue the giallo formula with actual emotional resonance beyond just thrills. Small details across the film reveal how it's definitely the work of a spry octogenarian director, as anyone younger would probably make sure to include some throwaway lines about VPNs and burner phones to make the cops look less stupid. Bonus points for a classically cringy scene involving a gaming console!

Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (available on Netflix)

The second instalment of the Knives out has a good story, and I enjoyed the comedic moments and cultural references. As far as being a detective movie, it pays tribute to the story of a friend group stranded on an island à la "And then there were none", except it has its own spin on the characters. The host is multi-billionaire Miles Bron, played by Edward Norton, an asshole rich guy/genius stereotype who set up a huge company and decides to invite his friends for a holiday on his private island for a murder mystery game. Somehow Benoit Blanc gets roped in and arrives on the island with the others and starts his detective work. The movie's ending rounds up very nicely and also contains an excellent social commentary on the evils of wealth and hierachy.

However, the film has plot holes, a constant issue I have with Rian Johnson's movies. Although I genuinely applaud his aesthetic integrity, there are moments where I feel he is just creating shocking moments or plot elements to make the plot work. The most prominent example would be Star Wars: The Last Jedi, which I credit for completely ruining the Star wars plotline and shifting it in a completely different direction. In addition, there was no need to have a telekinetic plot element in the film Looper, which only became necessary at the movie's end.

This time round Glass Onion suffers from significant plotholes, which I will list in the spoiler section:

Watched Knives Out and Glass Onion back to back with a friend today; the former is an excellent mystery movie with an incredibly well-constructed story. The latter, while being not nearly as excellent, still has its share of cleverness and is just plain fun to watch; both are extremely well shot and are refreshingly current in their political commentary; Glass Onion especially is the most 2020s feeling movie I have seen so far (and not only because it is set during Covid!)
Highly recommend both of them if you have four hours and some change to spare.

Avatar: the way of water is the type of movie you watch just to experience the advanced technology in creating those CGI swimming scenes. A lot of the scenes are actually dedicated to showcasing aquatic alien plants and animals to the point where you think you are watching the Discovery channel. I was a bit uncomfortable wearing the 3D glasses for 3 hours in the cinema but I would recommend if you think avatar is a franchise worth following. There are apparently many instalments to follow for the Scully hybrid alien family.

I think there was a fairly huge step up in writing quality for Way of Water tbh. I mean its still a blockbuster film but basically a lot of the elements that I thought were lacking in the first film were all largely fixed here thanks to the addition of the character of Spider and his reasonably divided loyalties. I'm genuinely curious to see where Cameron is taking all of this now.

Even a character previously as one dimensional as Quaritch from the first film has evolved into this bizarre mix of Ethan Edwards and like, Vegeta lol.

The King's Man (2021):

A film ahead of its time, as in it feels like it should exist as a 20-years-later hard reboot of Kingsman, wherein the franchise is resurrected as a prestige alt-history thing. It's a bold film, certainly, and refreshingly not even in the edgelord way the previous parts were, but also one whose first act goes around writing checks that just cannot be cashed in the current blockbuster space. I mean, if the studio bosses ever allowed it, a Kingsman movie set in this time period would have needed to be a tragedy, considering it sets up a hero organization that immediately goes on a legendary losing streak. Like, in this alternate universe, what's their first big W? Ending the Cold War without nuclear annihilation? Was that their Hail Mary that miraculously worked and redeemed the group?

A hypothetical, more prestige treatment of this material probably would have also leaned more on juxtaposing the two factions and their respective brands of madness. The to-be Kingsman organization is a thing of idealistic madness, its future ethics born hopelessly too soon and immediately corrupted by the prevailing winds of the era, with its members turning into pacifist assassins looking to expand the Great War. The Flock initially seems like an even darker mirror image of the good guy team - a similarly modern, supranational cabal, perhaps after some twisted greater good agenda like the modern Kingsman villains -

Watched Patlabor: The New Generation: Tokyo War (Gray Ghost). It was pretty good though the subs were a bit suspect so there were some aspects of it that I'm still confused on (what the hell was the SV2's Legacy, that Gotoda calls "cruel"?).

Very much an Oshii Mamoru film with its long meditative shots and drawn out political and philosophical discussions; it's great. Few writer/directors can make me sit still for extended dialogue scenes and then have me think about the implications of what's said, long after I've watched their films.

Wish it had an official release in NA but I can't really expect a live action film of an anime/manga franchise that's not very popular in the West to have any kind of support.

Young Sherlock Holmes (1985):

Mid-eighties Spielberg producing a C-grade Spielberg pastiche. Imagine if The Goonies had aged like milk. Features a lot of garbage fan service found in modern cancerous prequels, such as giving separate origin stories to Holmes's cap, coat and pipe, and including a post-credits scene teasing Moriarty (there were no sequels). These days the film is best known for featuring the first ever fully CGI character integrated into live-action, but the stop-motion effects work is equally impressive, especially during Watson's LSD trip when he is assaulted by anthropomorphic pastries.

As a break from all the nonsense real life has been throwing at me these last few weeks, I took the opportunity to catch Suzume when it was playing at the local arthouse cinema. For the first film in-theatre in almost a decade, and first Shinkai since I noped out of 5cm/s at a frozen railway platform, it made a good occasion to get back into each of those.

First and foremost, the boy-meets-girl strand is not played as the core of the movie, but comes about 3rd or 4th in the queue, after such things as chasing trouble-making cats, and saving Japan when there aren't Yūsha or Tōji around to deal with a problem more of the sort they are geared up for. And it does have the visual lushness that we expect from a Shinkai movie. Nothing too profound, but certainly more than worth the time spent.

One remarkable thing about the movie, in retrospect, is that the associated McDonalds ad could be considered to contain a "canon deleted scene" - while there are many sponsors of the movie who have had co-promotions containing some excerpts (e.g. Narita Airport), the McD ad is one comprised entirely of animation, only part of which appears in the actual movie.

I just watched Transformers: Rise of the Beasts tonight. And I’d say it’s a pretty good film, on par with Bumblebee.

Watched Puss in Boots 2: The last Wish the other day; good movie. Nothing groundbreaking, but a simple meal done very well indeed.

The Flash (2023) has been shrouded with much speculation given that it sparks off the soft reboot of the DC extended universe (DCEU) into the new DC universe (DCU). With the Zach Snyder-era officially over, Walter Hamada stepping down as president, and the box office failures of recent DCEU movies, James Gunn of Guardians of the Galaxy fame will be taking over the reigns of the upcoming franchise, who will be writing and directing the new Superman legacy movie and assembling a new team to develop the DCU movies. With this new change, creates a domino effect, with Henry Cavill being replaced by his look-a-like David Corenswet for the role of Superman/Clark Kent, and Rachel Brosnahan replacing Amy Adams for the role of Louis Lane. The actors and actress for the remaining members of the Justice league are also undetermined as of this moment. Exciting times are ahead but can the new creative team really shake off the superhero hero fatigue that has plagued recent movies and strive towards critical and commercial glory?

The Flash, one of the last remaining DCEU movies, is helmed by director Andy Muschietti and screenwriter Christina Hodson, who are both members of the new creative team. Although there is more pressure for Superman Legacy to get things right, The Flash serves as the start of the running track with much expectation of the development of the new DCU later in time. However, the movie has been blighted by significant hurdles involving the lead actor, Ezra Miller, who has been accused of assault and grooming a minor, as well as other production issues and Covid-19. Previously, there had been many iterations of the script, with even Grant Morrison and Ezra Miller developing a script at one point, as well as numerous directors being considered.

The story was promising; the focus would be based on the popular Flashpoint comic that ties in elements of time travel and multiverses. Indeed, The Flash is naturally a more lighthearted and comical superhero movie compared to the dark tone of the Batman and Superman movies, similar to Spiderman for the Avengers. There was a lot of interest involving the cameo of the Batman legend, Michael Keaton, who will portray an alternate universe Batman. For the most part, I greatly enjoyed watching the movie in the cinema - it was a great cinematic experience with good visuals and excellent audience feedback. There were moments when audience members laughed, gasped in shock, and the girl next to me even shed tears during the moving moment of the end. I thought the performances of Batman, Supergirl, Flash, and the other Flash were funny, entertaining and suitable. It does not become boring or corny, despite reiterating past movie and comics concepts (You wanna get nuts, let's get nuts!!), as I think Andy Muschietti and Christina Hodson keeps things fresh and lively. Their direction can be greatly distinguished from the past Snyder films, which is a great plus.

Despite my overall appreciation of the movie, what can we potentially conclude from the ultimate commercial setback at the box office, if we ignore the other controversies I mentioned? I believe that audiences are not only suffering from superhero fatigue but also multiverse fatigue. There is only so much confusion and alternate universe/time travel tropes from Spider-Man: No Way Home, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, Avengers: Endgame, Rick and Morty, and the Oscar-winning Everything, Everywhere at once that we, as an audience, can take. For instance, there was a moment in the Flash, where Michael Keaton's batman unhelpfully info-dumps their concept of time travel using spaghetti as an analogy. It is ironic that the movie makes multiple comedic references to Back to the future (a movie riddled with time travel implausibility) considering that it makes even more incredulous hard-to-believe scenes related to time travel. Numerous moments of confusing plot-holes and left out information gives the feeling of an incomplete movie, despite the fact that there are no future Flash movies planned at the moment. James Wan, the director of the next Aquaman movie also seems to separate himself from the Flash by claiming his movie as a standalone movie. Unfortunately, for a film that is expected to tie up loose ends and prepare us of the next franchise, it just leads to more questions and a lack of closure. The ending, which I won't spoil, is also not very satisfying, and we are left waiting for superman to save the day...

Ninja from 2009 is one of my favorite DTV actioners thanks to its earnestly unironic attitude towards its remarkably goofy subject matter. Scott Adkins is obviously a genuine martial artist so the cleanly shot and edited action scenes look better than in many A-list tentpole films, and even though he may be a bit of a limited instrument as an actor, Tsuyoshi Ihara picks up the slack as the genuinely menacing baddie Masazuka. His whole evil tech ninja look is so iconic that most versions of the film's cover art feature him and not Adkins' hero character Casey. It's clearly a film made by people who wanted to make a ninja movie, which shouldn't be a surprise considering director Isaac Florentine got his start working for Cannon Films; as one reviewer put it poetically, Dudikoff walked so Adkins could run.

The film did well enough to warrant a sequel, with Mr. Florentine returning to direct. The original had some cleverly written story beats, including a final twist that was a fun modern take on the orientalist magic woo often associated with ninjas, and similarly Ninja: Shadow of a Tear introduces a genius set-up for continuing the story. As the backstory goes, during World War 2 the Japanese sent a special ninja detachment to Burma to target the Allied troops there. These bushido-addled warriors couldn't stomach Japan's eventual surrender and chose to stay behind in the jungles, taking up drug trafficking as their new source of livelihood. It's a brilliant way to bring in new villainous ninjas and to justify the sequel's cheaper South-East Asian filming locations.

Too bad this inspired writing doesn't extend beyond this set-up, as the rest is just your standard revenge flick. Casey's wife gets fridged, and soon he's in Thailand cracking heads and trying to find the people responsible. The action is as great as ever, and Adkins still gets to don the full ninja garb, but the overall experience is hollower and more dour. Having Casey be a lone avenger doesn't play to Adkins' strengths as he cannot pull off the sort of sweaty fish out of water vulnerability the story tries to go for. Action heroes often have sidekicks for a reason, and Casey has an entire dojo's worth of bright-eyed ninja cadets available, so it was a bad choice not to give him an ally to interact with. If your star can mainly kick and punch and not much else, you want to offload some of the acting duties to supporting players.

The bigger flaw with the writing is the lack of a thematic conflict that characterized the original film. There Casey was an outsider, a gaijin who nevertheless ended up defending the ninja traditions and ideals against Masazuka, who represented a modern, entirely mercenary corruption of the ninja concept. In the sequel the roles have seemingly reversed, as Casey with his Disneyfied dojo now represents modernity that comes under attack by hardcore traditionalists who presumably think he's a sellout fake ninja. The sequel should have gone for this sort of more ideological conflict, as the first film already pitted Casey against a perfect physical opponent in Masazuka. Their one-on-one duel is almost an impossibly hard act to follow, especially with a lower budget, so instead the stakes should have been about whether the villains can corrupt Casey to their side rather than beat him in a fight. Sadly, this doesn't happen, as there is once again a twist, this time a stupid one that reveals a stealth villain with a truly idiotic, self-destructive plan. Perhaps I'm being petty by focusing on such things when the action is so good, but the first film was such elevated straight-to-video buffoonery that returning to standard revenge-punch plotting inevitably feels like a letdown. But at least the revenge-punching looks damn good.

Raging Bull. i really liked it, dont know if i can watch it again tho.

powermaiden02 wrote:Raging Bull. i really liked it, dont know if i can watch it again tho.

It might be Scorsese's best tbh, though yeah its a rough watch. It's been about 10 years myself since I last saw it (Though I do have shiny new Criterion 4k...) but I suspect watching La Motta destroy himself just gets sadder and sadder the older you get.

I thought I would review the phenomenon of Barbenheimer given the huge interest in both movies since their simultaneous release on 21 July 2023. They are vastly different from each other, and their box office success can only be attributed to their distinct qualities, which allow them to be packaged together. It could be suggested that audiences for each film can be predominantly split by gender given that the feminist themes of Barbie and the masculine war aspect of Oppenheimer led by a male cast (the movie unsurprisingly fails the Bechdel test). This can be true to some degree as when I went to the cinema to watch Barbie, some of the audience members wore pink and were mostly female, but I think Barbie can be enjoyed simply as a fun movie based on the cultural icon of Barbie and how it impacted women worldwide whereas Oppenheimer is a gritty and realistic depiction of a real person who endured fame and guilt as a result of developing nuclear weapons that could destroy the world. I watched Barbie first and then Oppenheimer, since Barbie was only two hours and was bit more light-hearted, but I am not sure if there would be a difference watching it in reverse.

Barbie was a pretty enjoyable and funny movie and can be considered a comedy musical with multiple layers of gender conformity (men and women), existentialism, and feminism. The story focuses on Barbie in Barbie-land as she goes into the real world after experiencing an existential crisis and begins to learn more about how women are really like in the world. Ken is her underappreciated boyfriend who always tries to win her affection before going through his own journey of self-discovery when travelling with her to the real world. I definitely don’t think this is a typical children’s movie like other toy-based movies such as the Lego movie or Jumanji, as it delves into more serious and meta topics, and I think it does a good job and mixing the serious and non-serious elements of the film, without being corny. You can tell the sophisticated way in which Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach incorporated their style in the movie, which has roots in mumblecore and Woody Allen style monologuing, and I think this works well juxtaposed with the goofy comedy. The music was great, and a standout feature of the movie and I fully anticipate a Broadway musical adaptation of Barbie arriving in the future. I often thought that the movie breaks the fourth wall in several instances, as if to speak to the audience directly about various feminism issues, which I think can be a bit too intense and over-the-top at times. Overall, the direction, performances, music were great and worth considering viewing on the big screen.

Oppenheimer is a dark and convoluted biographical movie, that captures a moment in time, which pivoted between scientific breakthrough and world annihilation. Oppenheimer is a flawed and brilliant character, and the movie investigates greatly into his personal life, which I think can be split in three parts: his beginnings in science, the Manhattan Project, and his persecution over his past communist affiliations. The style of the movie is very similar to Christopher Nolan’s Memento as we flip between different moments in time, from when he works on the atomic bomb development and when he is being investigated. In addition, we also get an objective view of him from his enemy Lewis Straus, who attempts to undermine him numerous times after World War 2 (filmed in black-and-white). The best parts of the movie are when we feel a real sense of weight, grandeur and amazement about the science and people involved in the project, especially the risks involved as they prepare for the Trinity test (FYI we don't get to see the bomb being dropped in Japan). The technical brilliance of the movie is highlighted by the visual effects and direction, but we also get a sense of the personal troubles of Oppenheimer when he is faced against a committee during a hearing about his political allegiance. The last hour of the film was very dragged out and hard to understand as it primarily focuses on his persecution and it almost feels like a trial movie rather than biographical movie. Notably, the scientific jargon and various mentions of people’s names can be confusing for those who have not read up on the background. Overall, I still felt a sense of amazement and appreciation after watching the movie. In some ways it does complement the pink and glamour of Barbie, with its own aesthetic of being dark and technical, just like Ying and Yang.