The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Pondosinatra]

Joker



Rating: 4/5

Director: Todd Phillips

Main Stars: Joaquin Phoenix, Robert De Niro, Zazie Beetz, Frances Conroy, Brett Cullen

Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) spends his days working as a clown and his nights taking care of his increasingly unwell mother (Conroy). About his only true enjoyment in life comes from watching his favourite late night talk show. He dreams of one day becoming a famous stand up comic and ending up on that very show. Living with a medical condition that leads him to burst out laughing when nervous leads to numerous misunderstandings and even physical abuse. Never the most stable, as he tells his therapist that 'all he has are negative thoughts', he truly becomes unhinged after getting fired from his job and then learning a deep secret from his mother that she's hid from him all these years.

Again, not having the highest regard for comic book movies I wasn't sure what to expect, but it had good buzz and I really like Joaquin Phoenix. Happy to say this is a must see, not only for fans but also for movie lovers in general. Here we have a gritty, realistic portrayal of mental illness that doesn't shy away from graphic violence (unlike most in the genre) combined with social commentary with the Batman mythos as the backdrop. And I truly got a kick out of how it tied into the beginnings of that story. I always wondered why a random stranger would kill Bruce Wayne's parents. Now it all comes together.

As well, you have to mention the amazing physical transformation of Mr. Phoenix. I would easily put this up there with Christian Bale's jaw dropping appearance in The Machinist. And while I didn't quite have the same visceral rush of just wanting to murder someone like when I came out of the theatre having just watched Natural Born Killers back in the day, it was pretty close. It's easy to see why the FBI was concerned this movie would incite the unstable amongst us to violence.

One reviewer said something along the lines of 'This is not the movie America needs right now' - implying that all of that nation's woes are because of the sitting President. I think this is exactly the movie they need right now, but instead of highlighting the disparity between rich and poor it would be applicable to today's cancel culture and the sanctimonious mouthpieces lecturing half the country that they voted wrong. The same fate befalling them as with some in this film would equally bring a smile to my face.

The rarest of comic book movies. One that's actually truly enjoyable and far exceeds your typical CGI crap fest on every level.

[Pondosinatra]

A Midnight Clear



Rating: 4/5

Director: Keith Gordon

Main Stars: Peter Berg, Kevin Dillon, Ethan Hawke, Gary Sinise, Frank Whaley, Arye Gross

Will Knott (Hawke) leads an intelligence team sent on a mission to setup at an abandoned chateau in the Ardennes and report on German troop movements just prior to their biggest counter attack of the entire war. The army thought they'd get better intelligence if the squad was made up of the smartest people. Unfortunately the smartest people don't necessarily make very good soldiers and their group is soon reduced to only six people. When they finally do encounter the enemy all the rules of warfare are thrown out the window and things take an unexpected turn.

According to the director, this film had the misfortune of being released the weekend of the Rodney King riots and thus came and went without much notice. I myself have this on Laserdisc, but had never gotten around to watching it. There was apparently a release that came out on DVD but the transfer was horrible and it was in a 4:3 aspect ratio. All of which is a shame as I would put this up there with A Thin Red Line and Jarhead as some of the best Anti-war movies - even more so because this was set in WWII which was considered a 'good' war.

Unlike most Hollywood films where the actors are a decade or more older than the characters they're playing, here they all really were just kids - and this was one of the first films for both Ethan Hawke and Gary Sinise. I've always enjoyed Ethan in everything he's done and here he brings a innocence and vulnerability which is just right for the role. The rest of the cast are equally strong. But really it's the story that sets this apart and based on the 1982 novel by William Wharton by all accounts it stays true to the source material.

Sadly I knew where things were headed early on and when it came it was still depressing to watch. However there's enough funny moments, tenderness, and examination of the human spirit to round everything out and prevent it from becoming an overly disheartening experience.

A victim of bad timing and a dearth of quality releases on video - this is a rare gem that deserves to be watched.

[Aloha from Hawaii 73]

Knight Errant 4/6 , Wang Yu as cab driver vs three japanese brothers , they blame Yus dad for their fathers suicide......its all right

[Aloha from Hawaii 73]

Showdown at Equator 4/6 , starring Liang (hes barely in the movie) , Lo Lieh and first lady of Bruce Lee films , Nora Miao

Restaurant under threath from triads and a cop has to go undercover to bust them , just something to kill time with , nothing more

I also watched this movie several times, it is great
Some horror movies are imaginary and people do not enjoy watching movies, but this movie depicts reality.

[Pondosinatra]

JoJo Rabbit



Rating: 4.5/5

Director: Taika Waititi

Main Stars: Roman Griffin Davis, Scarlett Johansson, Sam Rockwell, Rebel Wilson, Archie Yates

JoJo (Davis) is a young boy growing up in Nazi Germany. As his Dad is out of the picture having possibly died fighting in some far off country, his sister recently deceased and his Mom often away, he's quite lonely and frequently bullied by others. He only has his pudgy best friend Yorki (Yates) to commiserate with. Actually that's not true. Yorki is really his 2nd best friend. His best (imaginary) friend is none other than the Fuhrer himself who extols the virtues of National Socialism, how to be a better Aryan, and to always be vigilant for those treacherous Jews with their horned heads.

Having seen the trailer and heard some buzz about the film I kind of knew what to expect going in and I had already figured out where the story was going from the beginning. But still, the first few minutes of the film was a bit jarring and uncomfortable. I kept asking myself where it was going. You'd find yourself laughing at something but then the little voice inside your head would remind you that you really shouldn't be laughing at the subject matter. It's a weird juxtaposition of imagery and content. Another reviewer wrote 'What if Wes Anderson made a Nazi comedy?'. That nicely sums up the movie's quirkiness.

Eventually things become more serious although there's still moments of hilarity sprinkled throughout - a sequence involving a bunch of Gestapo agents Heil Hitler'ing each other is especially humorous - and there's one particularly gut wrenching scene near the end. When the end does come I'm glad they wrapped it up the way they did. Had it gone in the other direction I would have been upset not only because I simply wasn't emotionally prepared for it but it would have done a massive disservice to the tone and spirit of the film.

All the actors give great performances. I love Sam Rockwell in anything he's done and once again he shines here. Rebel Wilson is, well, Rebel Wilson, but thankfully she's used sparingly. Scarlett Johansson is effective as the mom and brings that 'old Hollywood' glamour. But the real stars are the two kids - Davis as JoJo and Yates as his friend. But it is Yates that really steals the show.

There's also lots of well thought out details. You wonder why they keep focusing on his Mom's shoes for instance. There's something more to Rockwell's character than is immediately apparent. The film's colour schemes change from an oversaturated and bright palette in the beginning to dull, grey, and dreary by the end - representing not only Germany's waning fortunes in the war, but also JoJo's eventual rejection of Nazism. And so on.

I rated this movie so highly because in today's era of cancel culture, political correctness, and general outrage I'm amazed that this even got made. The important, touching, and life-affirming meaning at the core of the film notwithstanding. But even more so, because of how the director deftly navigated such a minefield of shifting tonality. In lesser hands this would have been an outright disaster.

A terrifically quirky film with a heartfelt message and surprising emotional heft near the end. Recommended viewing if you can reconcile the subject matter and jarring initial tone.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

The Color Out Of Space (2019)

Imagine, if you can, the terror of encountering something so alien that you can't really see it. A color outside the spectrum of human vision. A color that will transform everything around it into an otherworldly monstrosity.

This is the eerie, unnamed thing that invades the Gardner farm when a meteorite lands on their property. It's a precarious household already, with one teenage son (Brendan Meyer) hooked on weed, one teenage daughter (Madeleine Arthur) dabbling with Wiccan rituals and the Necronomicon (because it wouldn't be Lovecraft without it, duh), and the mother (Joely Richardson) struggling to make ends meet with her Internet business in the wake of a mastectomy. The father (Nicholas Cage) tries his hardest to keep the family glued together despite his ill-advised investment in alpacas. Their youngest son (Julian Hilliard) watches with awe as neon lights erupt at night. Before long, every family member witnesses unsettling and macabre episodes that preclude the coming of what might be a larger alien force that can't even be comprehended.

Richard Stanley adapts HP Lovecraft's short story with a surprising amount of personality, especially since Lovecraft's stories are best known for their ideas and monsters than their characters. Despite all their dramas and issues, the Gardner family are an interesting pack I can root for, before watching in dismay as they all fall apart. As expected, the cosmic forces become the centerpiece of the movie, and it does deliver ample amounts of grotesque abominations and dazzling neon lights.

The film has been criticized for the mere audacity of trying to capture something that is literally "unfilmable," a feat that makes this particular Lovecraft story a failure to adapt. And yet, that never stopped Stanley, just as it never stopped a few other films before this one--most notably, 2010's Die Farbe, which cleverly showed the unfilmable color by turning the entire film black-and-white, save for the alien threat (which was a vibrant pink). What Die Farbe failed to do, however, was engage. It was a very droll affair with no characters to latch onto and very drab composition. While I kind of wish Stanley's film would have used the same B&W trick, I think he captures the theme just fine by doubling-down on the neon lighting--cheap perhaps, but the film smartly contrasts its alien colors with muted, natural colors around the farm. I think it's just fine that way.

The chain of uncanny encounters are hardly new. Some of the mutations invoke the same formless monstrosities that made John Carpenter's The Thing so memorable. What happens to the plant life is something that we've recently seen in Jeff Vandermeer's Annihilation, and its film adaptation (and it just so happens that the shimmering-eye effect from Garland's film is also repeated here). Even the premise echoes the Jody Verrill's tragic tale from Creepshow (itself based on a Stephen King short story, with King himself playing the part in Romero's film). It felt as though a brief history of cosmic horror cinema played before my eyes, but it never came off as a rip-off. If anything, all these horror callbacks probably owe their successes to Lovecraft to begin with--to see the creature and gore effects carried over feels like a circle has been completed.

One thing I find striking is how much of the family conflict reminded me of other Stephen King works--most especially The Shining, with Nathan Gardner's arc mirroring the madness and familial pressures that Jack Torrence faced (influenced by other forces nonetheless). It's especially uncanny that Nicholas Cage and Jack Nicholson play their respective father figures with an exaggerated level of expression, both walking the fine line of insanity between terrifying menace and over-the-top absurdity. The Cage Rage is as volatile as ever, with outbursts that will elicit a laugh or two (maybe even a meme). And yet, Cage also embodies insanity in a way that invokes threat and fear.

The story by nature splits its time among all its characters, pushing the two teenage leads as the real protagonists who discover the alien threat first. But it's a random hydrologist (Elliot Knight) who gives the bookending narration and leads the charge in the end. With all these varied points-of-views (many of which carry emotional baggage), it's hard to latch onto any single character to root for (doubly so when characters make dumb decisions or act strangely, which happens on occasion). The experience is made palatable with fair writing quality, solid camera composition, and an appropriately synthetic score from Colin Stetson.

2019's version of The Color Out Of Space achieves the right effect, invoking horrific visions of glowing entities and unnatural monsters in the midst of a troubled family. There's a lot more spunk and spirit to the characters than existed in the short story and other adaptations--coupled with the film's solid quality, I find much to enjoy and appreciate. However, customary to the themes of Lovecraft, this is a bleak, nihilistic experience that harps much on the fragile nature of mankind next to cosmic things that can't be truly seen or understood. Combined with a fair amount of gore and occult tropes, and some outrageous scenes, it can be a harsh watch. What I find more redeemable, however, is Nicholas Cage's extraordinary acting, which despite having laughable moments is actually terrifying (just like Nicholson from The Shining). I am also smitten by the film's style and effects. Rent and behold the colors for yourself, if you dare!

7/10

Curious if you've seen the German version??

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Curious if you've seen the German version??

Die Farbe? Yes, probably several years ago. I really wasn't a fan, I found it rather drab, bland, and slow. The color effects were solid though.

I know I've read the original story for a college class, but it's been so long that I've probably forgot most of it by now. I ought to reread all the Lovecraft, since I do have the collection on my bookshelf now. Die Farbe is probably closer to the story, if I remember it well enough, but I find Stanley's film more watchable.

[Full Effect Ed]

Hey guys, forgive me if this is the wrong place for this but I wanted to share a new movie podcast that I just started with my 12 year old daughter. It’s called “Mad-Dad Movie Review” (her name is Madilyn) and the concept’s pretty simple: as I introduce her to all my favorite films & cult classics for her first time, we record an episode on each film and release it every Monday. This week we did cover a movie she had seen before, but it’s Birds of Prey and she requested it so I figured what the hell..
Anyways, I hope this is the right place for this post and my sincerest apologies if it isn’t, I just wanted to share this with anyone into movie podcasts and wanted something new & fresh to listen to. We’re on all major platforms and reviews are genuinely appreciated! Thanks guys

https://anchor.fm/mad-dadmoviereview

[Pondosinatra]

Vivarium



Rating: 3/5

Director: Lorcan Finnegan

Main Stars: Imogen Poots, Jesse Eisenberg, Jonathan Aris, Senan Jennings

Gemma (Poots) and Tom (Eisenberg) are a young couple. Like most young couples they dream of having their own home and living in domestic bliss. In pursuit of that goal they pop into a realtor's office one day. The realtor is only to happy to show them the latest development in suburbia - however there's something extremely 'off' about him. Still, mostly as to not offend they agree to go with him to find their dream house. A decision they soon regret as they become trapped in a nightmarish hell with no escape.

When I watched the trailer for this several months ago I made a mental note to check it out when it was released as it definitely had that 'well this is different' vibe to it.

I believe in one of the promo posters it says something about it being 'straight out of Black Mirror'. Therein lies the problem. I think this probably would have made a better episode in that excellent TV series than as a feature film, albeit one that's only 97 mins long. That said, there's nothing overtly wrong with it as a movie. And days later I find it still echoing around in my head - always the sign of a good flick. And conceptually I think it's great even if the message isn't overly subtle - domesticity and suburbia are living hells. The acting is also fine. I'm somewhat neutral about Eisenberg as an actor, but I really enjoy the lovely Imogen Poots. For one, I just love saying her name, and two she readily worked her way into my heart during her debut in 28 Weeks Later.

So why not rate it higher?

For some reason while watching it just left me feeling somewhat ambivalent about it. Maybe it's the timing. Being isolated during a pandemic makes one less receptive to seeing more of the same on the screen? I don't know. It could also be the monotony of the daily routine which while driving home the overall message doesn't make for overly gripping viewing. Although they do throw in enough sex and outright messed up imagery to pep things up. Maybe they could have spent a bit more time exploring Tom's obsession and mental fragility or Gemma being torn between revulsion and motherly instinct. Or maybe they could have just thrown in more sex - for my benefit at least.

An intriguing, if flawed, premise that may have worked better on television than as a feature film. If you want to watch something different, worth a rental at least.

[namarang2020]

I am also a fan of this film because it introduces people to the psychological dimension and makes people think more about their psyche and inner dimension.

[Pondosinatra]

Trick 'r Treat



4/5

Director: Michael Dougherty

Main Stars: Anna Paquin, Leslie Bibb, Brian Cox, Dylan Baker, Quinn Lord, Dylan Baker

This is my Halloween pick for the year.

Normally I'm not a big fan of 'modern' horror films. I think I can count on one hand the number that I have liked from the past two decades. That said, I was flipping channels recently and came across this on AMC's Fear Fest - I had it muted in the background while I was putzing around and occasionally watching it.

It peaked my interest when the main character (Bibb) came to an unfortunate demise in the first few minutes, a gimmick that has previously been done before in Scream. But then you see her again later in the film and it dawned on me that they were telling a bunch of different stories all interwoven together. You'd be focused on one group of characters and see something happen to someone else and then later on they'd tell that person's story. So I thought that was a definite cut above most of the dreck horror flicks released lately - most of which consist of just quick edits and lame jump scares.

So because of that I ended up streaming it and watching it in it's entirety.

In addition to the overlapping story lines - of which there are five of them - you are introduced to what I think is one of the most interesting horror 'villains' in recent memory - Samhain, or Sam for short. A clever take on the name for a real phobia consisting of the fear of Halloween. The little guy is equal parts horrifying and adorable. Once you figure out what his 'issue' is you begin to appreciate him even more. Thankfully he's not just another mindless killing machine. There's also a nice mixture of dark humour, creepiness, gore, and prerequisite eye candy resulting in a well rounded and entertaining experience.

For what it's worth, the wife who's normally not into these movies also really enjoyed it.

A pleasant surprise and a standout entry in the genre. Recommended.

[Damon1281]

Is the "version you've never seen" the same as the "extended director's cut?"

[Pondosinatra]

1917



4.5/5

Director: Sam Mendes

Main Stars: Dean-Charles Chapman, George MacKay, Daniel Mays, Colin Firth, Pip Carter

Set in the trenches of France during the darkest days of the first World War, two corporals are assigned the dangerous task of being runners to get a message across no man's land to another company set to walk into an ambush laid by the retreating German forces. Failure to get the message through in time will mean the deaths of thousands of soldiers, including the one corporal's own brother.

To commemorate Remembrance Day this year, I decided to watch two recent blockbuster war films released only a few years apart. The first was Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk and the second was Sam Mendes' 1917. Rather than review both separately, I'll instead focus on why 1917 is the much superior movie.

Both are visual wonders and both faithfully recreate the era they're in (Dunkirk being set in WWII). Technically Dunkirk is superb with some amazing set pieces. I need to go back and watch the special features to see exactly how they managed to have a set consisting of a sinking destroyer for example. While 1917 doesn't have that degree of wow, it does have what some might consider a gimmick that was hugely discussed leading up to its release. Namely, the implication that the entire film was done in one continuous take. When I heard that, my initial reaction was to cry bullsh*t - there was no way that was possible. However for the first half it honestly looks like it was done in a single continuous take (it actually wasn't). Regardless, it's amazing to witness and draws you thoroughly into the story and the characters.

And that's where the two films diverge. When the credits rolled in Nolan's epic I was left with a profound sense of 'meh'. While full of sound and fury you simply aren't emotionally invested in things. It's a very cold feeling film - you feel like you're watching history unfold, but you are never really drawn into it - precisely because you don't end up caring about any of the characters. Part of that's because you're watching four separate but intertwining stories, but most of it is because that's precisely how the director wanted audiences to experience it.

While the storyline in Mendes' film is fairly simple, at least you care about the people in that story. You become emotionally invested in their fate. And thus 1917 is a much more well rounded film and better overall experience. As an aside, this is the director's second war movie, his first being the hugely underappreciated Jarhead which is one of my favourites of the genre.

The illusion of being shot in one continuous take, a storyline that engages the viewer, and the novelty of being set during the first World War all makes for a terrific and epic war flick. Highly recommended.

[Holmes]

Shadow in the Cloud

I enjoyed this film right up until I hated it.

It is a brief sit, lasting around an hour and 20 minutes sans end credits. The first 40 minutes are enticing. It is anachronistic in a well-gauged way—the pulsating, John Carpenter-flavored electronic score contrasts well with the WWII-bomber imagery—and the conceit of placing the heroine (Chloë Grace Moretz) in the claustrophic ball turret, and apart from the crew, is neat. It forces her—and us—to experience most of the action via the radio and what she can see through a small window, which enhances the suspense and foreboding atmosphere.

But then a switch-flip moment comes in the form of an abysmal and sentimental twist, and the film erupts into annoying, C-grade, sub-Fast and Furious green-screen action which I found impossible to invest in. Economy and craftiness give way to indulgence and ham-and-cheese antics. If one remains on the film's wavelength, it may seem zany or fun or 'cool,' but it shed my interest entirely in the home stretch.

** out of *****

[John Wright]

Hello, there!
"The Gray Zone"
I saw this movie a few days ago. I usually don’t like Holocaust movies, but a friend of mine finds this to be one of the most disturbing. In a way, he is right; some parts are totally disgusting (not because they are graphics or anything else, but because they are cruel). These things are worth seeing. Everything else (plot, characters, shooting, etc.) seemed to be pretty good, but it never made me fully involved. 3/5