#but i do think the rise movie is more emotionally compelling and has more character complexity | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

once-upon-an-animation · 6 months

Text

Finally watched the Super Mario Brothers movie. It was cute with a lot of fun references, but it was also incredibly shallow.

And before you come bitching at me about “kids movies don’t need to be deep!!!1!1!1!!”, the answer is NO, I did not expect a Mario & Luigi movie to be super complex. But I need you guys to understand that the depth of a narrative comes on a spectrum: A deeper story doesn’t have to mean adult-level maturity. It can just mean giving the characters more substance, or exploring their character arc with more emotions, or even just giving them a character arc in the first place. Not to mention, movies like How To Train Your Dragon, Rise of the Guardians, Despicable Me, Encanto, and Turning Red are also movies marketed towards children, but even they managed to be thoughtful and emotionally compelling as well. The idea that children’s content has to be shallow and can’t be anything else is ridiculous, and I will always shut down this argument every time I see it.

Anyway, back to the movie: yes, it was incredibly shallow. The only character that had anything that was even close to a character arc was Mario, and even then, it wasn’t very solid. It felt like the narrative couldn’t decide whether the arc was going to be about Mario feeling small, or about the brothers doing their thing together. If it was going to be about the latter, then the narrative should have had the brothers fight over something meaningful, and then have them reunite in the end. If it’s about Mario feeling small, that’s fine too, but they should have gone harder with it.

In addition, having Mario resolve this arc with powerups is maybe not a great way to send the message. Having him beat Bowser with nothing but his strength and wit would have helped that message more effectively. Like maybe have Mario be the one who thinks of using the shrinking shroom on Bowser.

With Luigi, there’s nothing to say. Didn’t have an arc, didn’t grow or change in any meaningful way, was just kind of there to be Mario’s brother and be rescued. I think a very easy arc for a Luigi, an arc that they seemed to be alluding to, is the idea of him learning to be strong on his own and to not always need his brother’s help. You can have had this narrative where Luigi is kind of co-dependent on Mario and can’t really accomplish things without his help and support. Then; when they get separated, Luigi finds himself alone and can either crumble, or learn to fight for himself and be his own hero.

Nothing to really say about Toad since he was just a side character, but heck, I’ve seen side characters with more depth than this. Tell me how Donkey Kong managed to have more substance to him than Toad with possibly less screen time? I mean, DK’s arc was by no means perfect and suffers from the same shallowness as everything else, but it was probably the closest I came to finding meaning in one of the character’s arcs.

But I have to say, out of all the characters that the movie’s shallowness negatively impacts the most, it has to be Peach. You have this character who has no clue where she’s from, who her family is, who her parents are. She’s taken in by this toad family and is made their princess (for a reason that the movie never bothers to explain). She’s the only known human in the kingdom until Mario comes along. She cares very deeply for the toads, so much that she’s willing to marry Bowser (not really, but the scene makes it seem like she’s going to marry him) so long as it means protecting her toads. And of course, she and Mario do a tad bit of flirting towards the end of the movie, alluding to a romantic connection.

There is so much to draw out of a character like this in terms of storytelling: the pressures of leadership, trying to find a place where you belong, being burdened by a forgotten past, the value of human-to-human connection, getting to enjoy life (and maybe even romance) outside of your royal duties, etc etc. There was so much that could have been done here, and yet, the movie just barely gave any of these things attention if at all. I will give them kudos for not making Peach a condescending girl boss and actually letting her be kind to her male peers, but that’s all I can say.

Bowser was alright. If you don’t give your villain a tragic back story, then I don’t usually care how deep you make them, so long as their villainy is fun and makes some sense. I don’t really understand Bowser’s interest in marrying Peach or ruling the world, which is why he’s “just alright” and not “great”. I didn’t need a super deep, complex story for him, but I at least wanted to understand why he was doing this, given that it was the biggest aspect of his villainy. He could have married anybody, or even just ruled without a wife. Why was it so important to him to make Peach his bride?

Honestly, the biggest thing that plagues this movie is “meh setup, piss poor execution”. In other words, the movie has a lot of potentially interesting ideas that they set up or alluded to…….and then nothing really comes of those ideas by the end of the film. They just toss in the ideas for good measure, but don’t actually do anything with them, which makes them feel really unsatisfying. There are a couple of examples, but Peach’s backstory has to be the most egregious. I don’t understand how you can have a character share something so significant, and then it just never comes up again. Like, ever. How on earth did that happen?

I’m going to wrap up before this post gets too long, but in summary: the movie was cute and fun on a surface level, but the hollow storytelling and underdeveloped plot threads kind of ruin the movie’s rewatchability for me. There’s nothing emotionally compelling to latch onto or discuss, so I don’t have anything else to say. The movie also feels like they want to set up a sequel, so maybe a sequel will do better and address some of the things that were set up here.

#the super mario bros movie #mario bros #mario kart #mario and luigi #princess peach #toad #bowser

7 notes · View notes

lavalamp-juice · 10 months

Text

MUTANT MAYHEM SPOILERS -

Movie Review/Rambiling alot

This is ur last warning >:o

AHHHH I LOVED IT

Visuals- BRO THE ANIMATIONNNNN UGGGG all the textures and little squiggles makes my brain go brrr. Was it just me or did the horses have googly eyes? Heh cute 🐎 UGH THE BABIES. THE BABIES. ALMOST FORGOT TO MENTION THEM. Ever since having an influx of babies in my family, those parent baby scenes have gotten to my heart strings. Those scenes used to never get to me but man they really do now I cried. It's really interesting how everything EVERYTHING in this movie is not symmetrical. Opposite Wes Anderson, I like to call it. It's eye candy. It gives me the same feeling as watching old cartoons that used cells. Like each frame is homemade. it helps bring life to the mundane.

I could see if people think it's a little too different for them to like, BUT NOT ME 10/10

The Turtles - Very teen it's cool. It is impressive to have teen characters that don't make me cringe and sink into my chair. So that's suchhh a plus! While most of there slang will be obsolete in a couple years that's fine. Actually making them act their age is a great decision.

Leo got that unintentional rizz. No bit actually has a show ever done a Leo April ship? It's interesting it was cute. I don't see much chemistry but tbh I think that was intentional / a good thing. I would have disliked if there was a bigger Leo April sub plot. I like how he was pretty reasonable throughout the whole movie. Not a total party killer, but also not lazy as a leader. It will be so interesting to see how they all grow 🥺

Raph- He's pretty cool, the brute as always not getting everyone one in trouble :D

Donnie- I know Mr. Rogan wanted too make them realisc teens, sadly this also took away Donnies super intelligence. It's very understandable but I wish he was a lil bit more of a nerd, saying something smart here and there. Probably my bias tho since I really like super intelligent characters :P none of Donnie's doohickeys in this one. It might be cool to see him throughout the series and other movies slowly begin to code and make stuff. At least his winning personality shines in this movie!

Mikey- Just Mikey being mikey. Its so nice seeing him happy and at the end go to High school and live among humans 🥺 it's the ending I kinda wanted for Bay verse Mikey, at least we can see it here!

The other mutants- Also very cool but there's a bit too many to really get everyone's say, which is what I was worried about when I saw the cast list. Other that SuperFly and Mono Gecko it felt like many didn't get a time to shine. (Especially Bebop & RockSteady)

Story/Plot- Honestly with all the all the TMNT content I have imbedded into my brain I thought I wouldn't ever see the "status quote" change SO dramatically. It was compelling to see that Splinter (and super fly) TRIED to go in the human world. And were automatically shunned and basically beat up emotionally/physically. The way super fly explained how he unalived that guy who was harassing them was scary. Very vivid and almost reminded me of Batman? Like the way SuperFly explained that he beat the guy up to a the point were the guy was no longer a threat (which is what Batman does) but Superfly, unlike Batman kept beating him up until... yeahh. It was sad that Baxter Stockmen apparently got killed? If I understood that right. It was very sad to hear especially cause again, baby stories are gut punching me. Baby SuperFly was cute I need a plush of him🥺 I'll raise him good not evil.

I had no idea the turtles and the mutants (other then SuperFly) were gonna team up so fast. It was a bit of a surprise but good.

The ending of all them moving in together tho. Also if they have so much space why don't the boys have separate rooms? Anyway, Team Found Family wins again <3

I really enjoyed Splinter noticing his mistake and like fixing so quick. It's a bit better than Rise Splinter where us arc takes awhile more.

THE TURTLES GOING TO SCHOOL?!?¿¡?!? ¿QUE? DOING WHAT NO TURTLE HAS DONE BEFORE. GOOD FOR THEM <3

The "I'm gonna turn the whole world into mutants" is kinda over done :/ but still good stakes!

Humor- Milk joke coming back full circle. Donnie your not supposed to be driving >:[ but while. Your at it go there. Heh it was funny and loved it.

Cons- Throw up joke. Ehhh just went on a bit too Long

Humans suddenly accepting is a bit too optimistic but I'll allow it.

Overall- Animation makes it worth watching and of course the story, characters and laughs. 9/10 I'm so excited to see it again!!!

#also i saw it on Saturday #but i wrote alot...#tmnt #teenage mutant ninja turtles #mm tmnt #tmnt mm #mm #tmnt mutant mayhem #mutant mayhem #mutant mayhem spoilers #ahhh #i really liked this movie if you couldn't tell.#movie review #lava reviews #lava posts

2 notes · View notes

sk1fanfiction · 3 years

Text

the many faces of tom riddle, part 5

- more myth than man... or not? the mortality of tom riddle and the anatomy of a villain-

That leaves us with Ralph Fiennes’ portrayal of adult Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort in movies 4-8.

I generally find adult Tom Riddle disappointing, even in the books, in terms of character depth. Instead of delving into his motivations and the inner psychology of a villain, we get... slight body horror? And in the movies, it’s even more egregious.

If a story is as good as its villain, adult Tom Riddle is a bit of a let-down, especially on-screen.

“I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost . . . but still, I was alive.”

Perhaps the very first time I watched it, I found this scary, but I must confess that nowadays, Voldemort’s resurrection is more funny to me than anything else. The forked tongue and the nose slits, yes, are supposed to allude to Tom Riddle’s loss of humanity, but I don’t think it...worked out that way in practice.

I know that’s how it is in the books, but ugly equals evil (and vice versa) is a tired trope. not only that, but under the CGI, Lord Voldemort is so difficult to relate to, so inhuman, that it’s hard to (1) see his true depravity (2) connect with him emotionally (3) at least for me, not laugh at him flapping around the graveyard in GOF like an oversized crow.

Now, the reason I’m going on about this is not (just) me being petty. Lord Voldemort is the Boggart for most of the characters in the HP universe, meaning their greatest fear is Lord Voldemort. He represents Fear; as such, he should be utterly terrifying. Now, I don’t mean horrifying in that sense, but Voldemort’s grand entrance should at least feel somewhat unsettling, have some sort of a Gothic atmosphere...

"But then, through the mist in front of him, he saw, with an icy surge of terror, the dark outline of a man, tall and skeletally thin, rising slowly from inside the cauldron."

Visually, this looks great. But it’s not scary. And I’m not a purist by any means, but the words are scarier than the book. Darkness induces fear.

“The lack of any kind of visual stimuli increases anxiety, uncertainty, and tension.”

So, having Voldemort’s pale body materialize isn’t as scary as it could be.

Furthermore, I think Fiennes’ overexaggerated expressions would actually come across as properly horrifying/threatening rather than funny if they just left his face alone. Yes, Fiennes does manage to emote the fear and the anger through the CGI, but it’s like he’s too alien to be scary, at least to me. The amount of memes with Voldemort suggest I’m not the only one this way inclined.

I think there’s probably a problem going on with the uncanny valley. (Images from the Mori essay linked).

[When things are still]

[Creepy things are creepier when moving]

Now, I assume Voldemort is meant to be zombie-creepy, or at least that how Harry describes him in the books.

"The thin man stepped out of the cauldron, staring at Harry...and Harry stared back into the face that had haunted his nightmares for three years. Whiter than a skull, with wide, livid scarlet eyes and a nose that was flat as a snake's but with slits for nostrils...."

Now, we can’t get Harry’s experience of being haunted by Voldemort in his dreams, because what I think makes Voldemort’s countenance so truly frightening to the other characters isn’t his snake-like nose or his red eyes, but the potential. Voldemort is, in essence, the Grim Reaper. You are at his mercy, and you’re probably going to be dead.

“This time, I shall enter the fray myself, Harry Potter, and I shall find you, and I shall punish every last man, woman, and child who has tried to conceal you from me. One hour.“

And yes, Voldemort can be quite funny and witty, but..

“I will allow you to perform an essential task for me, one that many of my followers will give their right hands to perform.” (To Peter Pettigrew)

...it’s still incredibly dark, sadistic humour. Whereas the teenage Tom Riddle we’ve been discussing has just barely dipped his toes into evil, Voldemort is, well... swimming in it. At this point, he think he undeniably enjoys causing pain.

And much of what makes Voldemort scary is subtle.

For example, what I personally consider haunting is the fact that he’s got a cave full of Inferi. A cave full of reanimated dead bodies.

Either he dug them up, which is unlikely... or perhaps, a twenty-seven-or-so-year-old Tom Riddle would lie in wait like a bird of prey, very quietly and patiently, perhaps reading a book, waiting for an unsuspecting Muggle to wander past. Maybe killing is a game to him at this point, when it’s not so personal as killing Harry Potter. Maybe it’s a whispered Avada Kedavra, and then he carries the dead body away to his cave. Maybe he Imperiuses them to walk off the cliff. Maybe he tortures them first.

Shudder.

And I don’t think you can show that kind of horror through any CGI or make-up, so...

You know what is terrifying? Revolting? True crime; real-life people who do unspeakably horrible things. And I think a lot was missed out on, in stripping Tom Riddle physically of his humanity. Yes, Riddle is a monster...

But, as we’ve seen, he’s a human monster, not some eldritch horror from the seventh level of hell or something.

I just think it would be interesting to have this perfectly normal-looking human do all the horrific things Voldemort does. I want to see that sick joy in a human face and feel disgusted. I want to see fear make his bottom lip tremble, and feel a misplaced sense of empathy. (Think President Snow from the Hunger Games -- now, that’s a sick, twisted villain who we can relate to as a human being, but still love to hate -- or what about The Joker?).

And out of everything they chose to CGI, why on earth did they not make his eyes scarlet? That might have made him look at least somewhat menacing, rather than a failed lab experiment.

(Don’t even get me started on his and Bellatrix’s death scenes in the movies-)

Here’s President Snow. He’s got a cute little granddaughter, he sends kiddies to kill each other Battle Royale-style every year, and he poisons all his political opponents. He’s also a master manipulator and has a penchant for white roses. They cover up the smell of the sores in his mouth from eating the poison too, to conceal his treachery.

Heath Ledger as the Joker in Dark Knight (2008), who is, according to NYT (which I totally agree with), the best Joker. Now this is a villain done right, with many Voldemort-like traits. On a scale of one-to-ten, he’s absolutely terrifying. Why? He’s (unlike Voldemort in the movies) incredibly intelligent, shows young-Tom-Riddle-like skills for charm and manipulation, plays with humans like they’re his own personal psychology experiment (and to hell with the Institutional Review Board), and has one, single, very clear goal -- chaos. Like Voldemort, he wears an inhuman mask that’s not horrifying in its own right; but unlike Voldemort, the human is all there -- terrifying, real, and with a bottomless, obsessive desire to destroy. His disordered thinking is all out there for the audience to see. The Joker’s motivation is to enjoy himself; whereas Voldemort seems to lack drive. Why does he want to take over the world -- who knows, with Voldemort? The Joker wants to see it burn.

Let’s try to do the same with Lord Voldemort:

[SLIGHT FLASH WARNING]

I had to go with this because Voldemort isn’t legitimately terrifying in many scenes. And yes, this unrefined anger somewhat speaks to Tom’s immaturity

By this point, seventy-one year old Tom Riddle is a hollowed-out shell of a human being. After decades of building his power, he was defeated by a one-year-old, and ended up slumming it as a spirit for a decade, got defeated again, was a shrivelled-up baby for a year, then finally got his body back.

He’s angry, okay! And Fiennes does a great job of portraying the sheer, destructive, unbridled rage of this character.

The body language. again, since his face is inhuman, this is super important. and Fiennes’ body language is great. Voldemort/Riddle commits to his actions. He is very emotionally-driven.

But yet, he doesn’t feel capable, in the way that the Joker or President Snow do. Yeah, we know anecdotally that he’s incredibly evil, sadistic, and second only to Dumbledore in terms of power, but he loses to a baby, and then that same baby as a teenager. So, we really could have done with seeing Voldemort’s power, cruelty, and evil firsthand a lot more often.

Voldemort is not well-characterized. I don’t understand his motives, and the ones that I do understand are not compelling.

Not to die? Well, he’s already made several Horcruxes. Why not sit back and relax? Why start a war and risk himself?

JKR said that Voldemort’s great desire was to become all-powerful and eternal. But that’s... boring! It does little to tell us about Voldemort, other than that he’s a villain and a wannabe dictator.

Furthermore, the charm, manipulation, and cunning that are hallmarks of younger Tom Riddle’s personality are gone.

Is Voldemort (to return to Jungian terms) all shadow? An empty creature of simple creation and destruction, perhaps? We’ll discuss this further down...

And this isn’t a problem of having a fantastical world with magic and the like. Grindelwald’s quiet, self-possessed, almost coy “So you think you can hold me?” was infinitely scarier than anything that has ever come out of Voldemort’s mouth. It was chilling.

OOTP is my favorite book, and the Ministry sequence is one of my favourite in the films.

This scene where he psyches out Harry, talking so quietly that he could just be a little voice inside his head (and again, during the possession scene)? Absolute perfection.

Why? Because this showcases what’s truly scary about him. Voldemort can get into your head. He can make you do things. And perhaps, if we had seen that more often, we’d understand how scary he is.

I wish this had been his grand entrance, and not whatever that scene in GOF was. Somehow, him screeching “I WANT TO SEE THE LIGHT LEAVE YOUR EYES!” is not menacing. At all.

But, I can’t help but think how much greater the emotional affect would be if he had more human features (think the burned-and-blurred, waxy features from Dumbledore’s memory).

Just imagine these scenes if Voldemort looked human, and spoke as quietly as he did in this one.

Because of the reason that I have little to go on in terms of characterization that I haven’t already covered, we’ll discuss the myth and legend of Lord Voldemort.

I can’t decide if the statue in the films is supposed to be the Angel of Death or the Grim Reaper. He has a skeleton and carries a scythe, but he also has wings. There are so many different interpretations, attitudes towards, and personifications of Death across the world that I don’t want to draw any one conclusion. But I must wonder if Lord Voldemort, with his yew-and-phoenix wand (which carries heavy symbolism of immortality and rebirth) and almost deified figure is meant to be a personification of Death himself? His name, Lord Voldemort, is a shade close to Lord Death.

For years, it has stumped me that wizards and witches are afraid to utter Voldemort’s name, especially since we only see the Taboo in the middle of the last book. It didn’t make sense just based on fear; in the real world, we don’t circumvent Hitler’s name, for example.

Perhaps this may have been obvious to others, but it wasn’t to me.

Here’s a counterargument to myself; why Voldemort shouldn’t look human.

Voldemort, in the Wizarding World, is seen as a literal deity.

I promised to attempt to answer this question in Part 3:

And so, I can’t help but wonder if the opposite is true… if Tom Riddle creates Horcruxes, would that grant him additional magic powers?

In Part 3, I likened Tom Riddle to a sorcerer in Russian folklore, Koschei the Deathless, also famous for sequestering his soul in objects. This source suggests that Koschei was considered not an ordinary magician, but a representative of the ‘other’ world, the world of death.

So, what if... creating Horcruxes makes you... more than human? Now, I could definitely see god-like status being appealing to sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle. Perhaps, even appealing enough to kill for. Now, his proclivity for Avada Kedavra makes sense. We know it’s an incredibly sinister spell, but at the same time, it’s a very humane way to kill. Why might it be so horrifying?

Here’s a weird theory.

To the best of my knowledge, no one but Voldemort is seen using the Killing Curse more than once or twice.

Perhaps, ordinary mortals can only cast Avada Kedavra a few times, but Tom, having split his soul and having become in some way a non-human instrument of Death, can cast it however many times as he likes, and that is part of what serves to make him so terrifying.

This makes the idea of Voldemort tossing around Avada Kedavras actually incredibly terrifying, if you take into account what that might mean.

The collective cultural fear of speaking Voldemort’s name supports this theory.

Take the chthonic (underworld) deities of Greek mythology; most notably, Hades and Persephone, the king and queen of the underworld.

Hades, the god of the dead, was feared.

So feared that the word ‘Hades’ (”the unseen one”) was so frightening, that people came up with all sorts of euphemisms to circumvent actually saying it and he was rarely even depicted in art. For example, they would refer to him as Pluto (”the rich one”), Clymenus ("notorious"), Polydegmon ("who receives many"), and perhaps Eubuleus ("good counsel" or "well-intentioned"), amongst many other names.

However, he was not seen as evil; just stern, cruel, and fair. Like most Greek gods, he had an associated cult (the Death Eaters, anyone?)

Another interesting connection between Hades and Voldemort is that Hades was associated with snakes.

Persephone (suggested to have a pre-Greek origin and probably pre-dates Hades), who was also a vegetation/fertility/spring goddess, similarly, was referred to as Despoina (”the mistress”), Kore (”the maiden”), etc, because as the terrible Queen of the Dead, it was considered unsafe to speak her name aloud. In mythology and literature, she is sometimes referred to as ‘dread Persephone.’

--Just like how Lord Voldemort is referred to as The Dark Lord, He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, You-Know-Who... (and if you’re Dumbledore, ‘Tom’.)

Her central myth served as the context for the secret rites of regeneration at Eleusis (which was basically a mystery cult devoted to her and her mother, Demeter), which promised immortality to initiates.

We don’t know for certain what exactly went on, because, mystery cult -- the members were sworn to secrecy -- but it revolved around immortality and rebirth and possibly psychoactive drugs.

Perhaps ironically, in comparison to the Death Eaters, anyone could join, as long as they could speak Greek and had never committed murder.

And that concludes my assessment!

#tom riddle #the many faces of #tom marvolo riddle #character analysis #lord voldemort #character study #tw: murder #the body horror was 1/10 #don't make your character design hilarious if you want him to be scary #i'm not saying voldemort is a vegetation deity #but i'm not-not saying it either

52 notes · View notes

adamwatchesmovies · 2 years

Text

Antlers (2021)

I’d wager that outside of North America, the myth of the Wendigo is largely unknown, which is why I can only think of three movies based on the legend. Out of all of them, Antlers is the best but there’s still room for improvement.

In the small opioid-addicted town of Cispus Falls, 12-year-old Lucas (Jeremy T. Thomas) takes care of his father (Scott Haze) and younger brother Aiden (Sawyer Jones) by bringing them meat to satiate the strange disease that afflicts them. Despite his efforts, their condition is only getting worse. Meanwhile, Lucas' concerned teacher, Julia Meadows (Keri Russell) reaches out to him, unknowingly risking her safety by doing so.

Emotionally, there’s a lot here. Julia has returned to Cispus Falls after her abusive and mentally ill father committed suicide. She left her brother Paul (Jesse Plemons) years ago and feels deep guilt over this, which is pushing her to help Lucas. The two of them have a lot in common with his father unwillingly turning into a monster but there are gaps in that connection. We know Frank Weaver was cooking meth when he stumbled upon the spirit of the Wendigo but the connection between the beast and drug addiction/dealing is tenuous and ultimately underdeveloped.

If there was an air-tight link between drug addiction, the way it compels you to ravage your body, and the Wendigo, which consumes the body of others… then it would be a clever spin on a familiar story. The outsiders feeling the wrath of an ancient spirit the aboriginal peoples know how to deal with sort of thing. As is, it feels as though writers C. Henry Chaisson, Nick Antosca (who wrote the original story this was based on, The Quiet Boy), and Scott Cooper (who also directs) couldn’t figure out a way to cast more than one Native American actor - and therefore have the characters "already know" what is going on - and not end the story in thirty minutes. While the film does manage to the same Google search montage scene we always have in these movies it just doesn’t sit right because once again, nothing is made of this choice.

The many criticisms I have come because Antlers does a lot of things well. Its monster is handled expertly, with it slowly teased and then revealed at the right point in the right way. The design is cool, memorable, and creepy. There’s a lot of atmosphere and effective horror elements. We see Lucas spot a small animal in the distance and pick up a rock. You think “serial killer in the making” but then the carcass - and the other roadkill he finds - is for an even more unsettling purpose. A small town overrun by addiction is a terrific setting for a horror movie. You believe these sort of ancient terrors could rise again in such a patch forgotten of decaying civilization. The performances are quite good, with young Jeremy T. Thomas keeping up with the seasoned actors. I just wish it did one or two things better.

Unfortunately, 2021's Antlers is already asking for a remake (or maybe a director’s cut, though I doubt that would add more Native American actors to the cast). The good news is this is the kind of film someone could watch and fall in love with despite its flaws. Enough of the film works that I would watch it again and encourage you to check out. (February 12, 2022)

#Antlers #movies #films #MovieReviews #FilmReviews #HorrorMovies #HorrorFilms #ScottCooper #C.HenryChaisson #NickAntosca #KeriRussell #JessePlemons #JeremyT.Thomas #GrahamGreene #ScottHaze #RoryCochrane #amy madigan #2021movies #2021films

4 notes · View notes

krazyclue · 3 years

Text

Italian in Name Only

I am a mixtape of European influences, but the two biggest are Italian and Irish, so it's maybe ironic that I've never been much for family. Not hostile toward it, more like disinterested.

Italians and the Irish have the reputation of being devoted to their families. If there's nothing quite like a good Catholic upbringing mixed with poverty to convince people to have loads of children, then being middle-class and an only child is the antidote. Never wanted children, never wanted to be part of a family, didn't even really have a notion of them. I just never thought about it.

Not until lately anyway, and I do not mean in the sense of having children myself. I mean of being suddenly conscious of a growing need to know what my origins are, to see how I somehow fit into the larger concept of a family. When my ancestors arrived in America, what they did once they got here, and how that differs from or mirrors what other families have found. This desire might have something to do with the pandemic and all that time spent alone when the world was shut down—the isolation making me want to reconnect and do so on a deeper level.

Most of my knowledge of Italy is from the movies, design, and fashion. My understanding of Ireland is even more limited since I spent my only visit there wandering between pubs listening to white guys with 'dreads spinning drum'n'bass. I don't speak any Italian beyond a stray "Ciao, Bella" or "Vaffanculo." I know the second one because English soccer fans used it in a taunting chant whenever they played Italian teams ("Where were you in World War 2? VA-FFAN-CULO!!"). My father spoke fluent Italian when he was a child but forgot most of it in adulthood. My immediate family is small and spread by time, distance, and some animosity; I know very little about most of the members of my extended one. If I have cultural heritage, it's hard to know what it is.

I am not at all sure what made me start to think this way. It could have been watching the HBO adaptation of My Brilliant Friend, based on Elena Ferrante's novels. The show is a portrait of two women growing up in 50's Naples. We see their lives against a backdrop of a country coming fitfully to life after the devastation following the Second World War, its progress held back by repressive patriarchy. Grim moments often give way to more ecstatic ones before doubling back again the other way, leading to emotionally vivid set pieces that capture the personal and historical in the same scene. The score by Max Richter alone can induce yearning and seeing the young, very inexperienced cast gradually develop into compelling actors makes the whole experience unforgettable, like the best work of the Italian neorealist cinema.

But My Brilliant Friend is set in Naples, and my family is from Tuscany. Italy, like the States, is a country of regions that do not always like each other, the north versus the south, and my ancestors would have been culturally different from the show's characters. Still, carried by the show, I find myself more and more drawn to thinking about Italy—I have roots in Germany and France as well, but for some reason, Italy is the country for which I feel the strongest connection.

Possibly I am entirely led by my stomach. Early in the pandemic, I started getting into Italian cooking, going carefully through a copy of Essentials of Classic Italian Cooking by Marcella Hasan, who you might call the Julia Child of that countries' cuisine. I have a copy of Silver Spoon too, a compendium of real recipes from Italian families, from which I've made a few dishes, and I have my grandmother's pasta maker, and somewhere on an index card her hand-written ravioli recipe. It took all day for her and my grandfather to make that recipe; she stirred the slow simmering meat and prepared the ingredients, and my grandfather painstakingly sealed each ravioli with a fork.

My German grandfather may have loved his pig's feet and pickled herring, but that obsession thankfully was not passed onto me, nor, as far as I know, to anyone else in my family. I might like a good stout too, even some Irish stew on occasion, but it's Italian food that captures my imagination. I am only beginning to know how each region has shaped that cuisine and the influences that created so many varied dishes.

I have not kept up with my family. I hardly know most of them, and outside of my parents and my uncle, I am not in touch with any other relatives. I forget the birthdays of even the closest friends and family; I must mark them on a calendar, or I'll miss the day altogether. My uncle has become something of the family historian and has been sending emails to nearly a dozen family relations. While I do recognize many of the names, there are far more that I do not remember and at least two I only know of by reputation. There are also people I met on that list, only once or twice, and those I saw most often were back when my grandparents were making their famous ravioli to go along with the Thanksgiving turkey, and that was a long time ago now.

Those emails coincide with my awakening interest in my origins. I know a few more names now: my great grandparents Enea and Italia Lorenzetti emigrated here in 1916 and had two sons; my grandmother's dislike for Enea, a man with old-world beliefs who thought women shouldn't drive, my grandfather's brother, who threatened to walk out if Enea told them how to run their business; a rift with the Catholic Church because a priest wouldn't baptize Enea's and Italia's daughter unless they paid him an indulgence, and that the girl died soon after.

I've seen family photos, the people captured in those images ghost-like in those black and white pictures, and since I am such a mongrel, I do not look at all like them. Of course, I'd like to know more, but really, what I want is a better sense of what Italy is and why I feel so drawn toward it, not only the particulars of my one family's experience. I will start getting to know my family, but that is only the beginning of reconnecting, not its conclusion.

As I read and study (and hopefully get to make that first trip to Italy after the pandemic canceled my trip scheduled for last October), I want to know Italy without romanticizing it. You can convince yourself that life is better "over there" when it's probably the same or worse. Okay, maybe better too, possibly much better. But I don't want to become an obsessive Italy fan. Or fall for obvious cliches—about how Italy is a place where people know how to live. Italians are all passionate and stylish, speaking with their hands, operatic and over the top, and all the other hot-blooded Italian tropes. I'm sure there's some truth there as well.

But Italy also had one of the worst Covid-19 outbreaks and still struggles with a government, often in disarray, that cannot impede the dominance of the Camorra clans in Naples. And Italy still hasn't quite overcome the legacy of Mussolini: a far-right movement led by Matteo Salvini remains threateningly close to taking power, a rise aided by racism and xenophobia. I do not want to idealize or unfairly condemn the place, but rather know Italy and its' people for whatever they are, so I can see how it shaped myself and my family. I want to take pictures in the streets, wander without a plan until I got lost and needed one. Maybe discover my operatic personality.

Coming out of this lockdown, old age not quite here but getting closer, as in just around the corner smoking a cigarette close, with the world isolated from itself, without any family of my own; maybe that is what sparked this need to connect with a sense of place, a sense of family. That's what being "white" can mean—it's when you've become so absorbed into American culture that your ancestry seems like it started around about 1980 (in my case anyway). I used to joke that my cultural heritage was shopping malls and Back to the Future movies at the multiplex.

I think that has some advantages to being part of a well-defined community or coming from a large extended family. If you have no family, you won't be assigned an identity by what they think you should be. You won't have as many expectations about your choices before you get to choose for yourself.

The problem is that you also have no sense of history or your heritage or how your small part fits into it the larger story. You are isolated. You can claim America, the nation of immigrants, but you make a claim not knowing where your people came from, and that might be the worst side effect of assimilation: forgetting the past. I've never known much about mine. I regret letting so much time slip before realizing family and heritage are so important. Now I am going to do my best to embrace my past, whatever it may be.

#family ancestors identity immigrants Italy USA America

4 notes · View notes

dailymilesmorales · 4 years

Link

Thor and Hulk are at it again. The Avengers' helicarrier is under attack by a swarm of robot minions under the command of MODOK, the head of a tech company who became a super-powered Inhuman villain after a catastrophe known as A Day — and still the raging green muscle finds time to hurl a projectile at Thor’s head. “Just like old times,” says the Asgardian, referencing a bit from 2012’s Avengers movie. Only this isn’t their next blockbuster sequel. It’s their first blockbuster video game.

Since the MCU has been put on indefinite hold in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic (see: Black Widow’s release date, production on the next Spider-Man movie), games — and, specifically, Marvel Games — are rising to meet the need for fresh stories. This year alone will see the debut of Marvel’s Avengers (Sept. 4) from the Tomb Raider team at Crystal Dynamics, plus Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales (holiday 2020), a separate spin-off of Insomniac Games’ 2018 Spidey adventure that revives the breakout Spider-Verse star.

“We always believed in the power of video games,” says Bill Rosemann, who’s like the Kevin Feige of Marvel’s gaming division. “We’re happy that more people than ever are discovering — even though you may be physically in different areas — [that] games can bring you together and create connections."

This next phase (to use an MCU term), which finally gives fans playable Marvel adventures on large console platforms, began with Spider-Man. Earlier attempts to make games of this scale, like an Avengers project planned to coincide with the original movie, fell apart. Leaked footage of this first-person effort, as well as a canceled Daredevil game, exist on YouTube as a glimpse of what could've been. The 2018 release, Marvel’s Spider-Man, finally webbed a green light because it was “all about timing,” says Rosemann. “It's all about what talent is available? Do they want to work with Marvel? If so, what's their passion? When you have all those things align, that’s when you can create something great.”

Jon Paquette, the lead writer of Marvel's Spider-Man, noted how one of their mantras "was to design an experience that felt like you were playing a Marvel movie." Out of that mission came a story about Peter Parker, a little more experienced in his years as New York's friendly neighborhood... you know, interwoven with a battle against a sinister rogues' gallery. It became the best-selling superhero game of all time, at over 13 million units. “We had a feeling it was gonna do that,” says Bryan Intihar, Insomniac’s creative director. "I mean, you don't [really] know. There’s this ultimate fear of screwing up one of the most popular characters.” When celebrities like Lin-Manuel Miranda and LeBron James began sharing images from the game on social media, they knew it had “reached another level."

They still didn’t know if they could make a sequel. There were two post-credits scenes that teased big things to come — another element borrowed from the movies — but that was them "stacking the deck," as Intihar put it. One stinger revealed that Miles Morales, an Afro-Latino teen from Harlem and a playable side character, also developed powers after a bite from a radioactive spider once held in Norman Osborn's secret lab.

“We knew really early that [Spider-Man] was going to end with him getting the spider bite," Intihar says. “We would tease it during development. I think everybody was focused on, 'Can you make the first one really good and we'll worry about the other stuff later?' But we wanted to have that set up so if it became a reality [to do another game] we could pull it off." At one point during an early workshop session, Miles was going to be a post-credits scene reveal and nothing more, but Intihar says the team determined it was important to "see the roots of him being a hero before he even had spider powers." Intihar adds of the final end-credits tag, "One of the reasons we put that out was to hopefully convince people that ‘He’s a Spider-Man now. Can we have a game with him?‘”

It paid off, partly because Insomniac went from being a partner with game publisher Sony Interactive Entertainment to being an official member of the Sony family once the company acquired Insomniac in fall 2019 for $229 million, per the company's financial statements. After that, "they were fully on board with the idea" for a sequel, Intihar says. Rosemann thinks of that first Spider-Man as "proof of concept." Now, for the holiday 2020 season (COVID-19 willing) Miles’ own game will further expand this virtual world.

In Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales, set in winter one year after the events of the previous game, Miles' Harlem home is on the verge of being torn apart by a war between an energy corporation and a criminal organization armed to the teeth with advanced tech. It's not a formal sequel to Spider-Man. That, if the coy responses from the creatives are any sign, may or may not be coming later. It's a shorter spin-off, likened in scope to the Lost Legacy game in the Uncharted series. Nevertheless, Intihar promises "it has a lot of heart."

"This is a full arc for Miles Morales that started in Spider-Man," Brian Horton, the game's creative director, says. "We really are completing this hero's coming of age in our game. It is a complete story."

The choice of a smaller narrative came amid discussions of what that hero's journey looked like for Miles in the context of Insomniac's games. After all, Miles, according to Marvel Comics canon, doesn't typically exist in the same reality as Mr. Parker. "When we started crafting it," Horton recalls, "we realized that, with a little bit more of a compact storytelling style, we could tell a very emotionally impactful story that would fit really well as an experience that would take Spider-Man 1 and [Miles Morales] and do justice to this character."

Miles may be training with Peter to hone his Spidey skills, but Horton and Intihar see him as "his own Spider-Man." The animation, the movements, the mechanics, even his powers (including bioshock and invisibility) aren't just unique tricks for this character, they are metaphors for that hero's journey the pair keep mentioning. Peter's origin "was born out of tragedy" — i.e. the death of his Uncle Ben — but Horton mentions Miles "is more so born out of family. What I think is really compelling about Miles as a character is he has friends that he could actually let into his world — his human world and his Spider world. He's a little different in the way he approaches it."

Despite all this spin-off talk, Rosemann isn’t actively overlapping his universe of interconnected games — at least not yet. It's more like a Spider-Verse. "Each game is in the Marvel universe, but they're in their own reality, if you will," he says. "Currently, our plan is to keep each game set in its own Marvel universe." It's part of his goal to give game-makers as much freedom as possible to craft the stories they want to tell. So, while this year’s Avengers won’t be linked to Spider-Man, it has its own web-slinger. Spider-Man has been confirmed to arrive in Marvel's Avengers as a DLC story sometime after launch. But when the game drops, it will also come with a lead character who maintains certain parallels to Miles.

[..]

#miles morales #games #games: spiderman miles morales #articles #long post

19 notes · View notes

thepermanentrainpress · 3 years

Text

THE PERMANENT RAIN PRESS INTERVIEW WITH MADELEINE SIMS-FEWER AND DUSTY MANCINELLI

Violation is one of the most stirring films we’ve seen over the past year. Since making its world premiere at Toronto International Film Festival last year, the Canadian flick has been busy on the film festival circuit; now available through digital-cinema on TIFF Bell Lightbox, with Vancouver International Film Festival (VIFF) Connect to follow beginning March 26th.

What inspired the story behind Violation?

We were both dealing with our own personal experiences of trauma at the time, and wanted to make an anti-revenge film that deals with female rage, and emotional and psychological unravelling that trauma gives rise to.

We really wanted to make a revenge film that pushed the boundaries of the genre, challenging the tropes of the scantily clad woman becoming empowered by violent revenge against a menacing stranger, and that revenge is the cathartic climax we are all seeking at the end of the movie. Yes, it is a film about seeking retribution, but also about the cost of that retribution. It is a film about violation, but also about lack of empathy and selfishness, and how both can erode your morality and the relationships around you.

It’s been described as “twisted,” “feminist-minded,” and a “hypnotic horror.” At its core, how would you describe the film’s genre(s)?

Those three descriptors fit perfectly, actually! We weren’t thinking too much about genre when we wrote the script, mostly about the story and about how we portrayed Miriam’s journey. We were inspired by films that don’t sit comfortably in a genre box, like Caché, Fat Girl, Don’t Look Now. Films that are dramas with elements of horror.

When you were writing the script, can you elaborate on the dynamics between the two couples that you wanted to portray – Miriam and Caleb, and Greta and Dylan?

Miriam and Caleb are very much at an impasse in their relationship. The spark has gone out and they don’t know how to reignite it. Instead of doing the work it might take to get through a rough patch Miriam is very much running away. There is a real transience to modern relationships that we wanted to capture in their dynamic - this idea that when the romance is gone the relationship has run its course. Miriam wants to fix it, but doesn’t know how - she clumsily tries to fix it with sex (on her sister’s advice), and this echoes how she tries to fix her trauma too.

Greta and Dylan have a seemingly healthy relationship. But when you look a little deeper their outward affection and codependence masks a deep distrust. Dylan is having his ‘grass is greener’ moment, and he’s totally selfish to the impact this has on those around him. Greta can sense this, but she’s too enamoured by him to risk rocking the boat. It’s all a recipe for tragedy really.

Miriam and Greta have a complex relationship, to say the least. It’s natural to have distance between siblings as they grow older, did you always intend to have a sibling relationship be a centre of your story?

Yes, we always wanted to make a film about a person who suffers sexual assault and is not believed by their sibling. That was one of the first parts of the story that came together. There is so much to unpack in a sibling relationship like theirs. A rich history of mutual failures and resentments as well as so much camaraderie and love. The more painful betrayal in the story comes from Greta, not Dylan.

We wanted to explore the idea of trauma within families, and how abuse and violence affects everyone in the family, not just the person who suffers it. Everything else orbits around these two sisters — Miriam and Greta — as Violation mines the little resentments, commonalities, shared joys and sorrows that weave together a truthful portrait of these women.

A lot of the horror and dread in Violation comes from the way the sisters interact, and in the ways they react to each other from a place of fear. There is no filter in these close sibling relationships (we know this as we both come from big families!) which can be wonderful, but can also lead you to hurt and be hurt in ways that leave permanent emotional scars.

The non-linear editing engages viewers into the story, as do the jarring intercuts with imagery of nature, animals and insects. Tell us about the editing and post-production phase, and what you hoped to accomplish with the progression and symbolism.

The way we have edited Violation is very deliberate. We are forcing you to experience things you might not want to in a very specific way, guiding you through this post traumatic landscape where the past and present are constantly speaking to each other.

We chose to weave two timelines together — the 48 hours leading up to the betrayal and the 48 hours surrounding the act of revenge. This forces the audience to re-contextualize what they have seen, challenging their own opinions of the characters based on what information we choose to reveal and when.

Violation is told completely from Miriam’s perspective — we watch her emotional and psychological unravelling as she struggles desperately to do the right thing. There is a sequence in the middle of the film where we see this act of revenge. There is no dialogue for a long time, we just follow Miriam as she goes through these meticulous actions. And what we realize is that her plan, though well thought-out, is unbelievably emotionally and physically taxing. She’s not prepared, and we watch the real horror of her actions play out through her visceral emotional responses. It was important for us to really force the audience to experience things as Miriam does. The editing is focused and relentless; never letting you stray from her experiences and emotions.

Madeleine, for you, getting to play Miriam and connect with her pain and turbulent emotions through the course of the film, can you share your thoughts on that experience. How did committing to this character challenge you as an actor?

It was the most challenging role I have ever played, and in many ways was absolutely terrifying. I wanted to push myself as far as I could go as an actor and challenge myself to really find the truth of who this woman is, and reveal that to the audience. There are so many quiet moments where Miriam’s journey is so internal, so the challenge there was in truly living each moment as if I was her — getting lost in the role — so that I was not indicating what she was feeling, but living it.

What was it like having Anna, Jesse and Obi as screen partners?

Very liberating. They are all extremely dedicated, layered, engaging performers. They elevated me and challenged me every step of the way. Jesse and I have worked together before, and we have an ease that makes scenes with him very fun. The comfort level we share allows us to really experiment. It was my first time working with Anna and Obi, but it won’t be the last. They are both so open and sensitive that I felt our work was incredibly nuanced.

An overarching question is whether revenge is ever justified. Tell me about Miriam’s mindset, and the struggle between morals, motives and her actions. For you as individuals, is this something that you have had conflict with in your own lives?

In a way we wanted to make a sort of revenge fairy-tale. Fairy tales provide ways for children to think through moral problems, and to wrestle with life’s complexities. They aren’t depictions of reality, but reflect ideas about morality and humanity. We wanted the audience to think about consent, the rippling effects of trauma, how we judge women vs how we judge men, and perhaps consider those things more deeply.

In the end Miriam’s desire to punish those who have wronged her hopefully leaves the audience with a compelling ambiguity to be unpacked as they scrutinize her actions.

Tell us about the trust built between the cast and crew on-set, especially during the more intimate and grim scenes and tense conversations. How do you build that comfort level?

It’s really just about having open, honest conversations. We spent a lot of time with the actors during prep and rehearsals just talking, and building friendships. We are dedicated to creating a comfort level where actors can be completely transparent and open with us, so that when we ask them to go somewhere they know we are there guiding the process and aren’t afraid to take big risks.

To survivors of trauma, what do you hope this movie provides in its story?

We hope to provide a new take on the revenge genre - one that explores rape from a different angle and context - with the focus of the narrative much more on the psychological ramifications of trauma. We aren’t looking to tell anyone what to take away from the film, and we made Violation as much for people with no experience with trauma as for people who understand these murky waters. Really we hope the film sparks thought, discussion, and empathy.

You met at the 2015 TIFF Talent Lab; what drew you together as a filmmaking team? What advice do you have for artists/filmmakers looking for their own collaborators?

It’s hard to pinpoint exactly what drew us together - it’s sort of an intangible thing. We developed a very candid friendship that we thought might translate well to a working relationship. Luckily it did!

Shortly after the Talent Lab we decided to work together on two short films, Slap Happy and Woman in Stall. Until directing these shorts neither of us had really had ‘fun ’making a film. Filmmaking was a drive, but it wasn’t a joy. These shorts gave us a totally new perspective, where we actually had a good time workshopping the script, creating a visual style, and just challenging each other. By the time we were making our third short, Chubby, we had decided to officially form a creative partnership.

We definitely approach filmmaking from different perspectives and with complementary strengths, but we don’t say ‘this is your thing and this is mine.’ We work collaboratively on every part of the process, and we built this unique way of working through our shorts, so that when we got the funding to make Violation (through Telefilm’s Talent to Watch program) we already had a solid method that works for us.

In terms of advice it really helps to know how you like to work before looking for a collaborator. Then it’s just about experimenting. It is very much trial and error. Don’t try to force a collaboration that isn’t working for you. There is no shame in a creative relationship not working out. But also it is important to be flexible and open to compromise - that’s how ideas flourish and grow. If you are too rigid then maybe collaboration is not right for you.

Going from short films to your debut feature with Violation, what new challenges did you face and how did you overcome them?

The endurance required to make a feature was something we weren’t prepared for. At about day 3 we turned to each other, totally exhausted, and were like: “there’s 30 more days of this.” It was brutally draining. Honestly every day brought its own unique challenges and problems to overcome, but we had such a strong, supportive team that it made each mountain a little easier to climb.

Aside from yourselves, who are some other up and coming Canadian filmmakers viewers should keep their eyes on?

Grace Glowicki and Ben Petrie are both doing really interesting work. Grace’s film Tito is a disturbingly good character study that builds a terrifying sense of dread. Ben’s short Her Friend Adam is one of our favourites, and he’s about to make his first feature.

Is there anything further you’d like to add or share, perhaps what you are currently working on?

Right now we are writing a slow burning mystery thriller and a twisted dark comedy. That’s about all we can reveal at the moment!

Thank you to Madeleine Sims-Fewer and Dusty Mancinelli for providing us with further insight into Violation! Visit their official website for more information on their projects.

1 note · View note

mbti-notes · 4 years

Note

Would you mind explaining why you see Rey as ESFJ and Kylo Ren as INTP from the new Star Wars? I've always seen Rey as a stereotypical ISFP action hero (quick to adapt to new situations, hands on, a fierce sense of 'moral right' borne of self), and I'm undecided on Kylo, but thought he exhibited FP tendencies -- a struggle between self-identity and rationality, that indicates a F/T imbalance.

[con’t: In reading Leonore Thomson’s book on personalities, the Fi-dom section brought Kylo to mind – unless prone to developing Se/Ne, the IFP fiercely guards their sense of ‘identity’ / self against outside influences and becomes rigid. Isn’t that what he’s doing, in differentiating himself from his parents and refusing to see reality any other way than what he has decided it is, based on his feelings / experiences?]

Judging by the debates I saw online, there doesn’t seem to be any general consensus on either character, which is interesting. It’s a trilogy and the character development beats are scattered and difficult to piece together. And there were several blanks that I had to fill with my own speculation. I didn’t really enjoy the process of typing these characters, but I did it because I kept on receiving requests week after week ever since the first movie came out. I found the character development arcs shallow and poorly paced, and the resolutions were too pat to be very interesting. I reviewed the Kylo and Rey scenes several times, with different personality types in focus each time, in order to ensure that the function pieces fit together to my satisfaction.

***** Major spoilers ahead! ******

Kylo

Although I think there are weak points in her book, I don’t take issue with Thomson’s description of Fi doms. I mainly disagree with the motive that you ascribe to Kylo. I don’t think he’s being protective of his identity, I don’t think he cares about identity, in the way that Fi doms do. I will concede that he gives the impression of being a rebellious teenager in defying his parents/mentor/birthright, but defiance alone does not make him Fi dom. Pretty much everyone (even some animal species) goes through a stupid teenage phase of rebellion at some point in their life, and some people never properly get past it. To me, he looks like a stuck-in-adolescence INTP: entirely too full of himself and blind to everything else.

One little point made it difficult for me to settle on a type. Leia was absolutely convinced that Kylo was “manipulated” by Snoke/Palpatine to join the dark side, but there was little indication from Kylo, Luke, and Han that this was actually the case. Should we trust Leia, since the movie portrayed her as being much more powerful than meets the eye, or should we trust Kylo’s subjective experience of himself as being fully and completely the master of his own fate? I go for the latter. If anyone’s going to be prone to blind belief, it’s a mom who doesn’t want to admit that she’s lost her son to her enemies. And I see no compelling evidence that he is a person who’s easily manipulated, emotionally or otherwise, which is a big strike against F. If you see such evidence, please present it.

The most revealing aspect of Kylo’s development was found in the conflicting and exaggerated accounts about what happened with Luke that led to the destruction of the Jedi academy. If you grow up being fed a constant diet of legends about galactic warfare from the Alliance, you’re naturally going to think of the Jedi as the good guys and the Empire as the bad guys (as we, the audience, are supposed to). However, if you’re Ben Solo, you don’t experience the Jedi as good guys, at all. He was “abandoned” by parents who were too busy/neglectful/high-minded to properly care for him and he was “abandoned” by a supposedly saintly mentor/uncle who wanted to kill him (even if the urge was fleeting). Additionally, Jedi training is essentially martial arts training in that you’re not supposed to use it violently unless you absolutely have to, which leaves the Jedi looking like total wusses much of the time, politically, always leading from behind and allowing evil to get a foothold over and over again.

Therefore, my theory is that Kylo turned, completely willingly, because he saw nothing but pathetic posturing and hypocrisy around him. It was an extremely deep cynicism (the belief that “good”, “love”, “happiness”, or anything that makes humans noble, don’t really exist) that allowed him to fully embrace his own darkness to very powerful effect - no manipulation necessary. This wouldn’t work with Fi-Te but fits with Ti-Fe. I postulate that his conception of morality was extremely reductive and childish. Essentially, “good guys should be totally free of bad”, so any whiff of anyone feeling conflicted or making dumb choices and they no longer get the privilege of being labeled as a “good” person. Accordingly, any hint of conflict in himself cements the fact that he is bad, irredeemably bad, because he’s full of conflict.

But I argue that the reason he’s full of conflict is not because he’s bad or a Feeler, it’s because the way he was being taught was not well-suited to his personality at all, in fact, it was quite damaging to him, which pushed him into skepticism and alienation. Here’s the blank I’m filling in: Luke is Fi dom. Fi and Ti do not communicate easily. Being forced or shamed into being good with no proper reasoning process by Fs tends to really aggravate inferior Fe grip problems in young Ti doms (it’s a common relationship dynamic). Fi doms construct beliefs from their feelings and it’s easy for them to expect that everyone should feel-believe the same. How is a person supposed to react when you keep telling them to Fi everything but they simply can’t or have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about? External manipulation or not, I speculate that Kylo was already in a deep state of doubt about whether he was in the right place. Luke’s intense fear and disgust in that fateful moment only confirmed Kylo’s suspicions that he didn’t belong there, and that Luke was no “good” guy.

Seeing oneself as irredeemably bad is a big blow to the ego, so one must engage in self-defense. The fact that turning dark allowed him to realize the full potential of his force capabilities, to him, meant that the Jedi were completely wrong in their conception of what is “good”. Therefore, he doesn’t consider himself to be bad per se, rather, he believes that he has discovered the truth about what it means to be great - being great via T is better than being good via F. He was trying to discover his true self through dominant Ti, perfectly normal part of development, but he chose the wrong path, because it was a reactionary decision that was merely rebelling against all the people who were trying to force him into being F. This poor choice meant that he had to keep trying to sever his connection to everything good in himself = disowning F. In his mind, the Jedi were stupid, weak, and deluding themselves all along, but he knows what’s up, and that granted him a high degree of confidence in his decisions. He saw himself as the real deal because he was smart enough and strong enough to be brutally honest about what he is. In essence, he’s no faker, and that makes him superior. These mental gymnastics happen with Ti, not Fi.

When Fi doms (even just start to) see themselves as bad, it ruins them and renders them impotent and dysfunctional (see previous post about Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender as a great example). Yet I see no compelling evidence that Kylo’s identity, feelings, or conflicts held him back, rather, they only served to fuel his rise. Despite appearances, he didn’t lust for power and validation like Te loop/grip, rather, he was only interested in self-mastery, and was willing to do whatever it took to achieve it, because he had no other ideal outside of himself to believe in. Nothing could really stop him unless he decided to stop. When he was frustrated, he would let it out in a quick burst, and then continued on as though it never happened (Fe). He was actually very disciplined in growing his abilities by setting consistent and logical challenges for himself to overcome (Ti), and he always succeeded in achieving his goals and reaching whatever potential he had envisioned for himself (Ne). Furthermore, someone who is very “defensive of their identity” wouldn’t be able to change themselves on a dime, as he did at the end. When faced with the right counter-evidence, he did a whiplash 180 without hemming or hawing or performative self-flagellation or whining about “losing myself”, etc. Would that be possible for Fi-Te?

Rey

Is she introverted? She is unapologetically assertive, she gets involved even when it doesn’t/shouldn’t involve her, she never balks at interacting with people/objects, she always faces situations immediately, she has trouble holding her tongue, she has difficulty introspecting (as evidenced from Luke’s training sessions), and most importantly, she exhibits no sign of needing a lot of down time to recharge. I’ve never known an introvert like that, let alone an ISFP, as they often dwell in their feelings away from the world and dislike taking on too much responsibility due to inferior Te. If she’s introverted, provide me with evidence, since I seem to have missed it.

I don’t think that there’s any evidence of N. She’s resourceful to a certain extent, but she seems to rely very heavily on other people to generate positive ideas and possibilities for reassurance, because she starts to panic when thinking on her own about “what could happen” (low Ne). She doesn’t easily come to intuitive insights about anything, let alone the future (no Ni). One scene in particular made me LOL. Luke was training her and asked her to close her eyes to meditate. He instructed her to “reach out” (to feel the energy of the force), and she extended her hand out physically into the air. That is the exemplar of being too literal. Furthermore, she spent how many freakin’ years following the same set routine day after day, in the same crap dump of a town, waiting obediently for her parents to pick her up? That’s the exemplar of Si discipline. Would SPs be capable of that patience or living in the dreary past for so long?

I agree that she is primarily motivated by her feelings when making judgments and decisions, which means F. She had to fend for herself since childhood, so her skills are unsurprising. Yet she irrationally lacks self-confidence despite the fact that she’s proven over and over again to be quite scrappy and capable, and people even tell her as much all the time - this is likely to indicate an inferior T insecurity. She has great difficulty (i.e. is unconsciously resistant to) probing around within herself, which is common for inferior Ti in not wanting to feel one’s own darkness. The fact that introspection results in her discovering that her deepest, darkest fear is being completely and utterly “alone” as a “nothing” in “nothingness” is very compelling evidence for inferior Ti.

If inferior Ti, then dominant Fe is a must. I see lots of evidence. She is inexplicably able to communicate with anyone, of any species of bot or animal, with effortless empathic understanding? Her first stance is to give people the benefit of the doubt, no matter how strange or wayward they seem. She has a very naive trust in the goodness of people despite dealing with crooks all the time. She takes it upon herself to bring out the good in people whenever she is in a position to. I don’t think she’s always sure of her feelings (Fi-Ni), rather, she’s always sure that there is goodness to be found if one only looks hard enough (Fe-Ne). A lot of people have strong moral feelings and values, so I’m a bit tired of the lazy stereotype that Fi doms have the monopoly on morality. If you’re going to reference a person’s morality, go deeper to see what exactly it is they believe, how they came to those beliefs, and how they express those beliefs in detail, as that would be more revealing of their functions.

For such a goody-goody-two-shoes, her response to Kylo wasn’t the judgmental disgust that Luke barfed up (Fi-Te) but rather a scary desire to figure him out (Fe-Ti). She seemed quite UNcertain about her personal feelings about him (not Fi), which made their relationship one-sided for quite some time, as she struggled with the push-pull dynamic. ESFJs are often attracted to “dark and mysterious” people due to the unconscious yearnings of inferior Ti, even when Si-Ne warns them that these people are bad news. And it doesn’t get more mysterious than some powerful dude dressed in black donning a mask that shows up in random visions. When avoiding him was no longer possible, she made an admirable effort to dive deeper into his perspective, even when she rightfully feared losing herself in the process. She felt compelled to “get both sides of the story” in typical diplomat fashion before deciding what to do, in hopes of “fixing” Kylo through repairing his relationship with Luke.

Although there seemed to be constant teasing about the possibility of Rey turning dark, I never really saw any possibility. She gave no major indication of being afraid of turning, and it seemed that she never lost touch with her strong desire to be good. She only ever indicated a fear of failing to perform her duty capably (Si) and of failing all the people who were relying upon her powers to succeed (Fe). Discovering her true lineage didn’t really shake her because her parents were good in spite of their bloodline, so there was already an “exception to the rule” for her to follow and emulate. Turning dark would sever and betray her emotional connection to her parents - totally out of the question.

As far as I can tell, the only reason she survived her horrible childhood relatively unscathed was because she held on to the belief that her parents loved her enough to come back, i.e., emotional connection to others is her lifeline. I don’t think it’s an accident that, in her moment of greatest need, it was the connection to past Jedi and their encouragement that saved her butt. She was existentially SHOOK when Kylo claimed that her parents were horrible and abandoned her. And she was only able to find her footing again by inserting herself (i.e. “belonging” to) the Skywalker clan, essentially by being the model of a kid that Ben should’ve been. What self-respecting ISFP would be happy latching on to someone else’s mom, riding someone else’s coattails, and literally defining their identity through someone else’s name and legacy?

I’ve heard some people critique Rey as a flat mary sue character, and I see where they’re coming from. But which type is most likely to resemble a mary sue at first glance? She is supposed to be the hero in a fairy tale after all, so one would expect her flawedness to be minimized.

Relationship Dynamics

In the final movie, the audience is bludgeoned over and over again with the claim that Kylo and Rey are meant to be a dyad. This all but guarantees that they will be exact functional opposites, otherwise, there would be no strong sense of complementary forces pulling them together into one perfectly harmonized and united front. Although the chemistry between them wasn’t properly developed IMO, I think I saw on paper what was meant to be happening in terms of the writer’s intentions.

Luke was unsuited to helping either of them with questions of identity and morality because, being Fi dom, he took these things for granted, presumptive, already settled non-issues, which amounts to him being closed to any real questioning and discussion. As a result of lacking good guidance, what drew Kylo and Rey together was an underlying need to help each other make sense of themselves, with the unconscious suspicion that the other person held the missing piece of the puzzle.

Rey was only able to reach her potential by confronting the full extent of her own darkness within (inferior Ti), which was what Kylo forced her to do in incremental steps, as he kept nudging her to question her fundamental beliefs about who she is and what she stands for, presumably in the same way that he had done for himself. But it’s not as easy to twist someone’s sense of morality when F is at the top and healthy versus the bottom of the stack. By making it through his gauntlet of tests and critiques and facing down her fears, she was able to develop into a stronger and more self-assured person to eventually achieve inferior Ti closure. Don’t forget how her eyes would light up when hearing stories of Jedi masters and their achievements. It is mainly EJs who run headfirst toward responsibility rather than away from it. We see, in the end, a picture of Rey as a beaming, confident, and self-possessed person who feels like the world is her oyster, fully inhabiting her role in the hero story that she had always wished to be a part of. The audience is meant to believe that she’s the rightful heir when she finally believes in herself.

By questioning Rey’s identity, Kylo eventually had to question his own as well, since he was the one who wanted to believe that they shared a similar path to feeling lost. Kylo is stuck in adolescent cynicism as explained above, with Si loop resentment from the past preventing him from seeing other, better possibilities for himself. Late in the trilogy, I see in his face that he’s probably suffering from the sunk cost fallacy of thinking that he is past the point of no return. Perhaps he believes that he has no choice but to resign himself to the fate he has chosen (parallel to Vader) since Ti doms strongly believe in personal responsibility. He’s not wrong. If he wasn’t irredeemable at first, he certainly was after the profound destruction he had wrought. Ti doms are rarely wrong as their logic is usually impeccable, but they tend to lack perspective. E.g. He’s not wrong in believing that people are hypocritical because they really are (Ti factual judgment is spot on), but then he defines his terms too narrowly in dismissing all people as unworthy of being called “good” (Fe value judgment is very immature).

What finally broke the mental confinement of Si loop? IMO, three contributing factors: 1) He started to suffer the same skepticism about the dark side as he had with the Jedi, since Ti promotes impartial judgment, which opened him up somewhat to questioning his choices. INTPs deeply dislike sheep mentality and blind ideology, so being constantly asked to prove his “allegiance” and quietly “submit” all the time by his superiors only served to reveal their flawed mentality in the same vein as Luke, which gave him the logical justification he needed for eliminating one boss after another. 2) He was drawn deeper and deeper into Rey’s psychology, which backfired on him, because it proved to him, again and again, every which way, that goodness is indeed possible, as Rey easily aced every temptation and challenge that he was able to fling at her. For NPs(Ne), believing in possibility can’t help but create a strong desire to actualize it. 3) Leia intervened with what I’m assuming was one last-ditch attempt to communicate how much she truly loves him despite what he’s become, which perhaps served to expand his thinking about what it means to love.

In the end, he redeemed himself on his own terms (even if he was not fully redeemed for the audience). As a result, he discovered something resembling happiness in his last moments of connection with Rey. You can’t tell a Ti dom to be good “just because”, or take goodness as default without question, or present a fake and idealized image of goodness for them to live up to, because that will never satisfy Ti. At the same time, morality cannot remain an abstract concept or else it is very easy to twist upside down. Goodness must be deeply FELT in order to be a motivating force, and he, at long last, felt goodness in his bones, through his decision to place the greater good above himself - inferior F often means arriving very late to the feeling party. He finally caught a glimpse of what he could be and should be through Rey’s, and possibly his mother’s, eyes, which allowed for inferior Fe closure. He had always gotten by okay without love and only believing and trusting in himself, but he realized that he was far better off for opening himself up to something more.

That’s my take anyway. Or perhaps that’s what I needed to see to make the story more interesting for myself, lol.

#star wars #rey #kylo ren #fiction #fictional depictions #esfj #intp #ask

43 notes · View notes

howdoyousayghibli · 4 years

Text

Miyazaki Finally Gives Up the Pretense, Makes Film About Man Who Draws Planes for a Living

“Spoiler culture” gets a lot of hate these days, and I get it. There’s a fine line between “how hard is it to not talk about the plot of a movie you just saw on social media” and “how hard is it to stay off social media for a little bit until you’ve seen the movie.”

I get the annoyance with spoiler culture, but I also remember the circumstances that led to our current situation. I remember the mid-2000s, when trailers had half the movie in them — and if that wasn’t enough, the movie’s official website usually went the rest of the way. I remember poring over detailed rosters of every character set to appear in an upcoming X-Men movie. Even Pixar fell into the over-sharing trap — The Incredibles villain Syndrome, who doesn’t appear until a good chunk of the movie has passed, had a bio on the official website with his “powers” and evil plan right there for 12-year-old Chase to read all about.

This led to teenage Chase making a conscious decision to not seek out information about movies that he already wanted to see, a policy I still roughly adhere to today. My greatest success was with Ant-Man, which I managed to see in theaters without having seen a single trailer. Usually, though, it means I just stick to teaser trailers.

This go-in-blind mentality is never easier than when writing these reviews, since there’s not exactly a marketing blitz, past or current, for Hayao Miyazaki’s The Wind Rises. So far, I think my policy of avoiding both trailers and reviews of these movies has served me well, helping me to form my own thoughts without being biased one way or another. Unfortunately, this policy may have done more bad than good with this particular movie.

The Wind Rises was released in 2013, and is (for now) the last film directed by Miyazaki. It’s a dramatized biopic of Jiro Horikoshi, designer of Japan’s infamous “Zero” fighter planes — but you wouldn’t guess that from the movie itself. Not knowing anything of the film going in, I assumed I was watching a historical drama, like From Up on Poppy Hill or Grave of the Fireflies. As such, I was confused at the pace of the movie, which skips freely through large portions of Horikoshi’s life. The rapid and largely unannounced jumps in time and the lack of chyrons made it difficult for me to get a handle on the time period — although I’ll admit it probably wouldn’t be nearly so difficult for someone native to Japan, who could likely guess closely enough from the clothes, architecture, and other context clues.

Beyond being confused about the setting, though, my lack of foreknowledge of The Wind Rises left me confused about the story the movie was telling. When you know a story is based on true events, it changes how you experience it. Studio Ghibli already departs from traditional Western ideas of storytelling and structure, and when you throw real-world subject matter into the mix, it goes further afield still.

This is all to say: I think I would’ve enjoyed The Wind Rises more if I’d understood what it was beforehand. It’s a bit like how I kept waiting for the magic to show up in Whisper of the Heart, only it was a bigger, structural issue — something just felt off, until I pulled up the movie’s Wikipedia page after it ended and suddenly things clicked into place.

Is the movie at fault for not spelling out its premise? Even the trailer doesn’t mention that it’s based on a real person. More than ever, I think that cultural differences may play a role here. I get the feeling that Jiro Horikoshi is relatively well-known in Japan; it would make all the difference watching this movie if you were vaguely aware of Horikoshi’s name and achievements.

As for the movie itself: it’s breathtakingly beautiful. The animation is almost insultingly lavish, like the third dining room on an episode of Cribs. Horikoshi’s glasses distort your view of his face, just like in real life. There’s a close-up involving a moving slide rule that made me gasp with its detail. The Wind Rises portrays Horikoshi as a dreamer, and his dreams constantly leak into the world around him, to wondrous effect.

The audio work is similarly audacious. Horikoshi’s (and Miyazaki’s) infatuation with flying machines breathes life into them, reflected not only in the lively way they’re animated, but also in the choice to use human vocals for the sound effects. The planes literally hum, roar, and gasp — never quite approaching cartoonish personification, but instead letting us see them through the engineer’s eyes.

Other aspects of The Wind Rises aren’t quite as thrilling. I think there’s something very worthwhile in the film’s message on trying to make something beautiful in a world bent on cruelty, but it’s a bit muddied by a strange insistence that creative people have only 10 years to produce their life’s work. It’s an oddly specific limit, made even odder by Miyazaki’s own prolific career — at the time of this film’s release, his directing career alone stretched over 34 years. This may sound like nitpicking, but the 10 years number basically bookends the film, so I feel justified in calling shenanigans.

Equally odd is the film’s love story. While beautiful and charming at times, it ends on an strange and unsatisfying note that makes me question the purpose of including it at all; did they simply feel that they couldn’t make a whole movie only about designing planes? If so, they could’ve done more to integrate the two stories, especially since this plot line was already entirely fabricated.

To end on a positive note: the voice cast for this film is impossibly stacked. You’ve got Horikoshi voiced by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, his work buddy voiced by John Krasinski, his boss voiced by Martin Short, Emily Blunt as his love interest, Mae Whitman as his little sister, Werner Herzog as his random German friend, Stanley Tucci as his Italian dream-friend, Zach Callison as young Horikoshi, and Elijah Wood in a role so small I literally can’t figure out what it was. It should be difficult to pick a favorite among such a lineup — and they all do great work here — but the runaway winner is, of course, Werner Herzog. The raspy voice and dry humor he brings to the sympathetic Castorp are a highlight of an already beautiful movie.

I fully expect that, when I read other reviews of The Wind Rises, they will have only the highest praise for it. I can see where they’re coming from; this is a movie with breathtaking visuals, an innovative soundscape, a moving message, and talented cast. For me, however, those individual elements aren’t brought together in the service of a compelling story.

Up Next: The Tale of Princess Kaguya! It’s the last film directed by the late Isao Takahata and I’m ready to be emotionally destroyed. It’s also the second-to-last Ghibli movie (as of 2019), which is wild! Will I finish these reviews before the year ends?? The suspense is killing me!

Alternate Titles: The Wind Rises: Because No One Wanted to Put Poppy Hill on Their Best-of-the-Decade Lists

#studio ghibli #ghibli #the wind rises #hayao miyazaki

37 notes · View notes

traceamountsoftimetravel · 4 years

Text

Ramblings on “The Rise of Skywalker” (Part II)

My raw and unedited notes from my viewing of Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

(Part I)

PALPATINE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE BIG TWIST IN THE THIRD ACT AND KYLO SHOULD HAVE BEEN COMPELLED TO DO THINGS WITHOUT PALPATINE'S DIRECT INFLUENCE. WRON bad reveal, show the characters reactions to the death star before the death star. you also would have been able to find the remains of a planet sized space station , dumbasses. the new side characters are either great or dumb but either way there's like too many of them. suddenly star wars becomes lord of the rings for some fucking reason. i'd say this movie is for the birds but that's an insult to birds, which is like making ducks eat bread, which is actually bad for them. okay, a ruined death star is a pretty cool setpiece, and it would be great if we got some parallels between rey scavenging in th estar destroyer from TFA and this. they missed so many chances here. the third act is in the second act. rey needed to beat kylo with reason but if she couldnt, then it comes down to sheer might. whatever. is kylo even fighting to kill anymore? there's a way to do this movie with the content you have but it clearly died in post. kylo should have disallowed rey from saving him with the force healing because he thinks he deserves to die after all this. that would have worked! for once, maybe chewie shoudl not have wailed. of what use was han solo's cameo? there needed to be less a touching father-son moment and more of a kylo ren emotionally devastated and angry at himself, about the only proper reaction. LUke doesn't catch the saber. LRey's throw wasn't enough. Luke just stands there, asking "you gonna pick that up?" there's a way. "how do you think i got here?" "I can only guide you, rey" do you know what this feels like? This feels like a simultaneous brain/heart/kidney transplant trying to fix this movie. at this point i'm too exhausted to keep complaining. why are there monuments to other sith leaders? Isn't the whole bend of the sith to destroy everyone else, not pay tribute to them? i guess good to know the empire/first order is only racist against aliens, as in extra-terreestrials. okay, the ground attack on the star destroyer would have been a little cooler without the horse things but whatever. it would have been a lot cooler had palpatine forced a final duel between kylo and rey, recognizing their strength as equal and really only needing one emissary. kylo recognizes this? stop establishing unnecessary romantic subplots. this is dumb. you can't fucking teleport lightsabers. the most offensive thing about this is how it just makes stuff up as it goes along. I feel bad for the people who bought into this so shallowly. I call bullshit on the scope of palpatine's powers. i know this is star wars, but this is unbelievable and without precedent. i didn't wholly mind the kiss scene but it needed to lack passion and more of a "thanks for saving me" thing. the characters needed to embrace chewie when leia died because we needed that ourselves. the notes the ending hits are okay but i'm not keen on how forced it felt. it's fine. like I said, ther'es likeable elements, but zero cohesion. i didn't feel the confusing gut punch that was the last jedi, but that's not putting this movie on a pedestal, that's for sure. It’s basically like embarking on a quest to travel Antarctica on foot. The first leg of the journey goes well. Then your boots get wet. The next thing you know, your body is succumbing to frostbite and a polar bear has eaten your supplies. Then there’s death, but not before thinking about it a lot. That’s what the sequel trilogy is: an attempt at a good thing that gets derailed by a colossal setback named Rian Johnson. The worst part is the dread that one day you’re going to have grandkids that beg you to put on Star Wars. And they key word is beg because any other day, you’d be the one putting it on first. But then comes the closing titles of VI and the dancing Ewoks and the sudden realization that you’re going to have to trudge through and explain the minutiae and the decline of everything after episode VII...

#star wars #the rise of skywalker #notes #ramblings

2 notes · View notes

arecomicsevengood · 4 years

Text

Watching Movies In Self-Isolation, Part Two

L’Assassin Habite Au Rue 21 (1942), dir. Henri-Georges Clouzot. Clouzot is better known for directing The Wages Of Fear (the movie William Friedkin remade as Sorcerer) and Diabolique, but this is the first movie he directed. It’s a pretty effective comedy, as well as an Agatha Christie style murder-mystery thriller. It’s really cool to watch these things that feel like they are just “movies,” before a bunch of genre conventions got built up and put in place. This one’s also eighty minutes long, super-short. The premise of the movie is there’s a serial killer on the loose, leaving a business card on every dead body. A dude passes along to the police that he found a stash of the business cards in the attic of a boarding house, so the killer must live there. A police officer goes undercover as a priest moving into the boarding house to investigate the residents. His wife, an aspiring singer, has made a bet with him she can solve the crime first, and in doing so become a celebrity that will be hired to perform places, so she also moves into the boarding house, partly to annoy him. The stuff at the boarding house is basically the film’s second act, while the first and third act are more typical murder-mystery stuff, although the tone of comedy is maintained throughout, despite all the cold-blooded murders.

All These Women (1964), dir. Ingmar Bergman. Kind of dumb sex comedy directed by Ingmar Bergman, but with gorgeous Sven Nykvist cinematography, bright jewel-toned pastels, and sort of theatrical staging in spots seeming to foreshadow Parajanov’s The Color Of Pomegranates or eighties Greenaway stuff. About a critic who visits the palatial estate of a famous cellist to write a biography of him only to find a harem of women; the whole thing unfolding from the cellist’s funeral a few days later. The winking humor is both music-hall bawdy but in a way that feels self-aware or “meta” in the context of a sixties film.

The Touch (1971), dir. Ingmar Bergman. Bergman’s one of my favorites, many of his canonized classics resonate deeply with me, but he was also astonishingly prolific, with a bunch of movies of his blurring together in my mind, and even more that I didn’t know existed, like this English-language one, starring Elliott Gould. Gould’s another favorite of mine, being in a bunch of great movies in the sixties and seventies, but damn, he’s unlikable here. Unlikable characters “hit different” in older material because I’m not sure if you’re supposed to sympathize with them according to the sexist cultural attitudes of the day. Here he’s “the other man” Liv Ullman is cheating on Max Von Sydow (RIP) with, but he’s pretty emotionally abusive, just a shit to her, extremely demanding of her in a relationship he did nothing to earn, though it does feel like the movie is kind of treating him as a romantic lead.

The Anderson Tapes (1971), dir. Sidney Lumet. This is heist movie, starring Sean Connery as a dude fresh out of prison, planning to rob his girlfriend’s apartment building, costarring Christopher Walken in his first film role. It contains all the plot beats of a typical heist thing, all the satisfying “getting the gang together, planning things out in advance, chaotic elements interfere” stuff but also a totally superfluous bit of framing about like constant surveillance, video monitoring and audio tape. All this dystopian police-state stuff seems, implicitly, like it would make a crime impossible to execute, the criminals are monitored every step of the way, by assorted agencies. But then the punchline, after everyone’s arrested for reasons having nothing to do with that, is that all this recording is illegal and all the tapes should be erased as the high-profile nature of the case makes it likely the monitoring agencies will get caught. Sidney Lumet directs a good thriller, even though I don’t find Connery (or Dyan Cannon, who plays the girlfriend) particularly compelling.

The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse (1933), dir. Fritz Lang. I watched this years ago, after reading Matt Fraction praise it, particularly how skillful the transitions between scenes were, and I really enjoyed it, but didn’t remember much about it and was excited to rewatch it. It’s got a lot going for it: An exceedingly elaborate criminal plot whose only goal is to wreak chaos, low-level criminals caught up in something they’re morally unprepared to reckon with, a charismatic police detective interviewing a bunch of weirdos, Fritz Lang following up M by continuing to be a master of film and sound editing very early stitching it all together. The Mabuse character was previously the star of a silent film I haven’t watched, and here he’s mute, which is a clever choice I didn’t register until writing it out just now. He’s gone completely insane, but is nonetheless writing a journal filled with elaborate crime plots, and his psychologist is completely insane and following these directions, in a commentary on the rise of Nazism in Germany at the time.

House By The River (1950), dir. Fritz Lang. I watched this in the pre-Quarantine days, but it totally rules. Again, it feels sordid in part because of how old it is and my assumption you’re meant to identify on some level with the completely loathsome protagonist’s sexual desire and anger at getting turned down. It’s so creepy, he’s listening to the sound of his maid showering at one point. All the characters seem very fun to play, they’re all pretty cartoonish. This guy murder his maid, and then gets the idea that he should write a book about the murder when someone explains the idea of “writing what you know” to him, and he is then surprised when his wife reads the book and puts together that it’s a murder confession, saying something like “Really? I thought I disguised it pretty well.” The film functions as a dark comedy because every character is completely mortifying. Lang’s work becoming less ambitious and more reduced in budget during his time working in America is pretty sad but this movie feels legit deranged.

Midsommar (2019), Ari Aster. Heard good things about Hereditary, but haven’t watched it yet, having been put off by the plot summary of Aster’s preceding short film, about a kid who rapes his dad. This is like a longer version of The Wicker Man, basically, starring Florence Pugh, who I had heard was like the new actress everyone’s enamored with, but didn’t think was that compelling in this. A bunch of Americans go to a Swedish village, one of them (played by Chidi from The Good Place) has studied their anthropology extensively, but all are unprepared for the fact that their whole culture seems to revolve around human sacrifice and having sex with outsiders so they don’t become totally inbred. There’s a monstrously deformed, cognitively impaired child who’s been bred specifically so his abstract splashings of paint can be interpreted as culture-defining profound lore, which I took away as being comparable to the role Joe Biden plays within the death cult of the DNC.

Long Day’s Journey Into Night (2019), dir. Bi Gan. This got a lot of acclaim, but I am almost certain the main reason I watched it is because the director made a list of his favorite movies and included Masaaki Yuasa’s anime series Kemonozume on it. Does a sort of bisected narrative thing, where half of the movie is this sort of fragmented crime thing, a little hard to follow, and then you get the title card, and then the second half is this pretty dreamlike atmospheric piece done in a single shot, with a moving camera. I’m not the sort to jerk off over long shots, although I appreciate the large amount of technical pre-planning that goes into pulling them off. The second part is pretty compelling though, enveloping, I guess it was in 3-D at certain theatrical screenings? I’m a little unclear on how my fucked-up eyes can deal with 3-D these days and I was never that into it. The first half is easy to turn off and walk away from, the second half isn’t but I’m unsure on how much it amounts to beyond its atmosphere.

Black Sun (1964), dir. Koreyoshi Kurahara. This one’s about a Japanese Jazz fan and dirtbag squatter who meets a black American soldier who’s gone crazy and AWOL. He loves him because he loves Jazz and all Black people, but the soldier is pretty crazy and can’t understand him anyway. Jazz is, or was, huge in Japan and this is a cooler depiction of that fandom than you get in Murakami novels but it’s a fairly uncomfortable watch, I guess because the black dude seems so crazy it feels a little racist to an American audience? Maybe he wasn’t being directed that well because there would be a language barrier but it’s weird.

Honestly the thing to watch from sixties Japan on The Criterion Channel is Black Lizard (1962), dir. Umetsugu Inoue, which I watched shortly after Trump’s election in 2016, when all the Criterion stuff was still on Hulu, and it cheered me up considerably in those dark days. It feels a little like The Abominable Dr. Phibes, but with a couple musical numbers, and is about a master detective who thinks crime is super-cool and wishes there was a criminal who would challenge his intellect. Then the Black Lizard kidnaps someone. It’s a lot of fun, with a tone that feels close to camp but is so knowing and smart it feels more genuinely strange and precise. One of those things you get fairly often where the Japanese outsider’s take on American genre stuff gets what it’s about more deeply and so feels like it’s operating on a higher level. I really love this movie.

I had this larger point I wanted to make about just feeling repulsed by genre stuff that self-consciously attempts to mimic its canonical influences and that might not be all the way present in this post. Still, something that really should be implicit when talking about movies from the past is that they are not superhero movies, and how repulsed I am by that particular genre’s domination of cinema right now, and how much of cinema has a history of something far looser and more freewheeling in its ideas of how to make work that appealed to a broad audience, and how much weird formal playfulness can be understood intuitively by an audience without being offputting, and the sort of spirit of formal interrogation connects the films I like to the comics I like (as well as the books I like, and the visual art I like), this sense of doing something that can only be done within that medium even as certain other aspects translate.

3 notes · View notes

thirdmagic · 4 years

Text

anyway now that i'm finally back on browser and can write long posts, full spoilery thoughts on rise of skywalker

i had a lot of time to think about it and honestly the more i did the more i went from 'i liked and was ok with most of it until the ending' and now the more i actually thought about it the more it progressed to 'actually, i kind of hate it, and there are individual moments that are very good that i love and then the ending ruins that too and now it rings horribly hollow and now i'm just sad and disappointed and also baffled at this whole movie'

first of all, the good part is: REYLO REYLO REYLO REYLO REYLO REYLO REYLO R E Y L O

i admit i had a very embarrassing reaction of pure unfiltered joy when they kissed because it was such a perfect moment, but also, in general? all the bits involving these two were easily the strongest and the most compelling. a lot of other very stupid bad moments tangled in between, but on the whole, when it was just them, their dynamic, their force bond, it was really intense and spicy and so resonant and beautiful all at one. i love them so so so much. their dynamic is SO juicy and good, their fights were amazing and gorgeous and also spicy and intense, and then the bits of palpatine fight where they interact without any words and just look at each other and you can just tell exactly what's going on without them even needing to say anything, the way they smile at each other and the love in their eyes, the tenderness in every motion, the encouragement when they see each other through the force bond in the middle of the ritual and rey just knows.... these moments are some of the best filmmaking in this whole movie.

unfortunately that was also when we got the bizzare exposition dump on her dumb backstory retcon that's very very delicately done so as to still be consistent with tlj and and this brings me to rey palpatine, which, on the one hand, is kind of the only rey heritage theory i'd ever accept and (ironically) the lesser of several evils that the heritage theories are, but also the undoing of what was really, really compelling in tlj about rey nobody and the horrible waste of potential that came from rey being a Nobody McNothing, her search for identity and ultimately accepting that it doesn't actually make her lesser as a human being, the potential that this movie is when she'll face her insecurities and emptiness and accept herself and find and forge her own path.... and also honestly it's dumb. it's really really dumb. if it had been built up to in any way in any of these movies, that would be one thing, and i actually find a lot of rey's struggles really interesting in concept but just awful and messy and forced in execution, and the idea of rey struggling with being good against an evil legacy and her own darkness is really compelling too, but rey doesn't need to be a palpatine or to want revenge on her actually good parents when being abandoned and alone her whole life is a very very good reason for her to have anger and hatred and darkness to struggle with. it also implies that she's evil because her great grandpa who she never met is evil and because genetics as opposed to like....... again, being abandoned and sold by two asshole jerk parents and having to repress the awful trauma of that her whole life and being unable to come to terms with it, which was interesting, and powerful, and very very real, and then it just throws away a really compelling set up for something really boring and bad. and then an ending for her that has no impact or emotional resonance and makes no sense and isn't in the least bit satisfying.

i will say though that i love love LOVE the dark rey fight, it was a vision but in the exact right Symbolic way, i loved rey struggling with her darkness in theory and it was the one and only part that was executed well, it was truly something that felt like it belonged here, it was eerie and intense and good. and unfortunately not properly followed on in any interesting way.

there were a few jokes that i liked and found funny! the way c3po says 'irony, sir' when poe asks him 'why can you not talk when we NEED you to' has me losing my shit, that was great, and also poe lighting the flashlight when rey uses her lightsaber as one was also hilarious. in general there were definitely a few actually purposefully funny moments that i liked.

ben's whole storyline up til the end was the only thing that really felt consistent and on track imo, a few missteps but mostly stayed solid, and I was very happy to get my bendemption. i can't describe how emotional i got at the scene with han and him throwing away his evil red saber and him calling han 'dad', and the force awakens callback-- i don't know why han is back as a ghost or if that's just a symbolic illusion or whatever, i don't care. adam driver is magnificent, and seeing him as ben again, seeing him comfortable with himself, and happy, on the light side, being playful while fighting and messing with the knights of ren because he’s so powerful and confident in his power, was worth everything. if there's one thing this movie really did right is that it made me suddenly realize that i actually love kylo-ben and also made me realize that i was so much more invested in his happiness than i thought, and unfortunately it made me realize this right as the story gave him maybe a few minutes or seconds of real joy and a beautiful sincere happy smile and then killed him off, and that's when i felt my soul being crushed.

look, i don't have tragic endings, okay, i don't hate even bittersweet endings, the purpose of an ending is to be satisfying and wrap up and tie together all the story strands in a way that makes sense for the story. that's not what this was. i would be willing to forgive the fact that the rest of the movie was a big stupid mess if it had just given the whole saga a proper ending, if it had been like umineko episode 8 which is also a big mess but with a perfect, beautiful, satisfying ending for the entire vn. but instead this just ruined everything, and made me feel miserable, hollow, and sad. this specific story, and trilogy, and nine part saga, did not need that kind of ending. we had a tragic and bittersweet ending for the first two, a happy ending to redeem all the misery of the skywalkers would have felt sincere instead of saccharine because you feel that they fought for it. and it would be a good complement to the rest of the movies and the message. instead we have two people who have both been lonely and emotionally isolated their entire lives finding solace and happiness and comfort in each other, finally finding a true connection and someone who understands them, but only getting to be together for all five minutes before the story rips them apart. and for what? what is this trying to say? what is the point? what is the point of doing that to either of them? how does this serve the story? what is the purpose of this? the tragedy and the depressing ending of the prequels is purposeful and intended and is done to make a point, because it's the story of a fall from the very start, by design, by its very premise. the tragedy of umineko is purposeful and done to make a point because it is about how these tragedies happen, and why, and the human behaviors that lead to them. how is it a good ending and how does it serve and complement anything in the rest of the saga to have one tragedy and one happy story with a bittersweet ending be concluded with a hollow pretension of a happy ending where one main character is miserable his entire life and dies when he’s still young after only a taste of the happiness that’s been denied to him, and the other loses her soulmate and is alone and surrounded by people who she herself said don't really know and understand her? taking on the name of a more famous family as if that's the only way she can forge and identity and meaning for herself?

ben's death actually had me so down and so sad i can't even be angry, honestly. the rest of the movie was full of dumb shit, it's like 80% mcguffin chasing with barley any actual character development or any substance and meat to it, rey-finn-poe have no chemistry because they were never supposed to have because they were never meant to be the trio of the movies until oscar isaac convinced jj to let poe live and that messed everything up because the thematic trio of these movies is finn-rey-ben, rose being sidelined because we need to please the racists who are threatened by her existence i guess and her relationship to finn ignored, the absolute waste of all the new characters and the incredibly stupid hux reveal that's also for naught right afterwards, rey's force lightning, the chewie death fakeout, the entire final battle being a big mess, finn not doing anything interesting or meaningful, the general weird bizarre baffling writing and dialogue choices and how it reads and plays out like something completely disconnected from not just the rest of the trilogy but the entire 9 movies and feels like a messy rough draft that a completed screenplay, and the all over the place pacing and everything... i would have accepted this is a weird, entertaining, fun movie if it weren't for the horribly depressing ending that makes what the creators apparently thinks is a happy ending ring terribly hollow and make me unable to find any joy in it. it's just so depressing i don't have the energy to even be fired up about hating it and i sincerely cannot for the life of me understand why it went this way. how is 'if you're miserable your entire life and make bad choices because of it your only way to redeem yourself is to sacrifice your life and have your one chance at happiness taken away from you because you don't deserve to live past your attempts to fix your mistakes and don't get to have a better life for your efforts'? how is that supposed to mesh with the rest of the story? how is that hopeful or uplifting or anything this saga is supposed to be? what even is this movie about other than the old and tried and redone ten million times 'believe in yourself and the friends you made along the way' message that means nothing at this point?

so yeah. thing bad. and i don’t even have the energy to be salty or angry. i’m just sad and disappointed and depressed about it all. and you know, coming from me, i’m very lenient and can find the good in nearly anything and can appreciate a lot of flawed and otherwise messy media for what it tries to do and for the good it does have. i love all the movies in the saga and i’m still a prequel fan. and the fact that i found this to be so disappointing and unsalvageable and tried to be positive about it and failed should tell you something.

anyway i'm going to go get a warm blanket, some ice cream or other comfort food while i go watch tlj again to cleanse myself and remember what good movies made by people who understand what's important are like, and maybe go watch marriage story and whatever other stuff adam driver is in, and find a way to watch knives out again, and then binge on the most self indulgent reylo fanfic i can find and a lot of fix-its to heal my soul. i'm not going to stop liking or caring about star wars, or this trilogy, which had one very pleasant solid movie and one excellent and fantastic one, and plenty of other good content out there, just because the last movie dropped the ball so hard, but i am going to stew in my sadness and angst about it for a good long while.

#tl;dr [deep sigh]#textpost

4 notes · View notes

the-strongest-stars · 4 years

Text

Saw The Rise of Skywalker with @skyguyed and here are my thoughts:

*disclaimer: my thoughts do NOT reflect those of skyguyed, she and I have very different views on the sequel trilogy*

Overall thoughts:

This was a lot. I will need 2-3 days to digest everything that happened fully. I do not think it was a bad movie, but its greatest weakness was that it tried to make everyone happy. And as a dear professor once told me: “Better to commit and whole-ass one thing, than half-ass a bunch of things”. Also, the plot line was out of control. They had subplots popping up in this thing like sandpeople- coming out of nowhere, hitting you over the head, and running away without resolution after stealing your money. This definitely was not the best Star Wars movie, and the sheer unruliness of it would make a rewatch difficult (in my humble opinion).

What I liked:

- I personally found Ben Solo’s character arc and main plot line to be the most emotionally compelling one. It had a clear thread of beginning, was followed fairly consistently through TLJ, and reached a conclusion that may not have satisfied all fans (I was not completely thrilled with it) but at least made sense. Adam Driver’s performance was (unsurprisingly) excellent, which absolutely helped.

- I liked that we got to see more of Rey’s personality in this film. While I still don’t think her character is nearly as fleshed out as it should have been, I left this movie knowing there were tangible personality traits I could describe in this character.

- Domhnall Gleeson’s performance was a delight

What I did not like:

- The virtual erasure of Kelly Marie Tran. She is in the movie, but after the amount of bullying and vitriol she experienced from fans last year, I was extremely disappointed at the limited screen time she was given here. It felt like an extra slap in the face.

- The amount of action. This movie was basically the antithesis of TLJ. If you want a 100% shoot-em-up, lightsaber swinging Star Wars film- this is it. If, on the other hand, you are seeking moments of quiet reflectivity (akin to what Luke experienced on Dagobah and Endor in ROTJ)- you will not find them. Every one of Rey’s attempts at meditation are interrupted by someone- perhaps a larger reflection on a character who wasn’t developed enough to stand on her own?

- As mentioned in the opener, the half-assed attempts to please all groups of fans. While I won’t go into specifics to avoid spoilers, I will say: Finn has a disappointing “half-assed” plotline, Rey has one, Ben has one, Poe has one. Each one is written in a way that grabs our attention, but puts so little on the line that we never feel acute loss when it isn’t fully realized.

- The cringey fan service moments. There were moments in this movie that completely undid what happened in The Last Jedi... all in the name of fan service.

Overall... I think a lot of these issues were continuity issues. Disney could have prevented these with proper planning.

I am not a movie critic, just another tumblr dummy writing out my loud opinions.

#star wars #tros premiere #tros spoilers #spoilers

2 notes · View notes

ariainstars · 5 years

Text

Rogue One or Why I (Probably) Won’t Watch This Movie Ever Again

It’s not as if I disliked “Rogue One”. I found it excellently made, from the political, philosophic, psychological point of view as well as with regard to settings, action scenes, acting, music, effects etc.

But why didn’t anyone tell me how deeply sad this story is?

“Rogue One” tells the story of a group of persons who all, for different reasons, have nothing left to lose and thus sacrifice their lives to help the Rebellion against Palpatine’s Empire. There is no reason for us viewers to get attached to the members of this crazy suicide mission: it is their destiny to die and we can sense that right from the beginning. Personally, I never felt compelled to root for them, I only felt terribly sorry for them.

It sure is interesting to be confronted with the reality that so many heroes gave an important contribution to the end of the war but never got anything good from it; also, how bleak and dangerous their lives in this totalitarian Empire were, constantly on the run, always oppressed, losing another piece of themselves over and over - family, health, mental sanity, safety, integrity, in the end life.

The only character I could feel with a little was Cassian, who stayed by Jyn’s side to the bitter end so she wouldn’t have to die alone. Jyn on the other hand never requited his feelings; her entire being was set on doing her father’s will, and Cassian, like everybody or everything else, was just a meaning to this end for her. (Though, in all honesty, she never compelled or manipulated anyone.) She may have been meant as a strong female character, but I didn’t find her in the least compelling or admirable. Jyn did what she had to do because she did not know what else to do with her life.

Jyn’s fate is a somewhat sarcastic take on the bond between child and father emphasizing that a father may give his child’s life direction and purpose but that this must not necessarily make him (or her, in this case) happy.

What baffled me most, in retrospect, was the reaction coming from most Star Wars fans. Long before I had watched the film, I had heard respectively only read of enthusiastic responses, usually culminating in “A real Star Wars film again, at last!”

Of course setting and design remind very much of “A New Hope”, because the story is set shortly before; and for brief periods we see the Death Star, Governor Tarkin, Leia and Darth Vader.

So then, this is what fans want, this is allegedly “real Star Wars”? Excuse me, depressing? Not the aesthetics and the message of the Prequels, the energy and drive of the classics or the new impulses and hopeful glimpses of the Sequels? Does it only depend on cosmetics whether a film is defined “real Star Wars” or not?

This whole story is a tragedy. It’s not a call to adventure with a happy ending like “A New Hope” or “The Phantom Menace”, a Greek-style drama like “Return of the Sith” or anything of the sort. It’s supposed to bring home that there is nothing wonderful about war and that everyone involved will lose much more than they win. This also fits to one of the Sequels’ themes, when we meet the old heroes again; they had won a war and founded a family - but before that, Luke and Leia had lost their old families, Luke had to give up his dream of becoming a pilot, and all of them suffered through tremendous physical and psychical horrors. And, as we learn, after a period of peace they had to watch their victory go up in smoke again as the embodiment of their hopes, their son and heir, nephew and pupil, turned his back on them and devoted himself to becoming evil like his grandfather, the very person they had fought against respectively tried to rescue and redeem all of these years before.

Yes, in a way “Rogue One” is “real Star Wars”. There is a person with father issues at the center, it’s an authentic, honest story, the characters are well-developed and the narrative is well thought out. But I was left almost in tears thinking how the hope Leia expressed in the last scene was founded on the absolute lack of hope of the protagonists of the crazy Death Star mission. I felt depressed for two days after.

Even “Revenge of the Sith” doesn’t make me feel that bad when I watch it, though the outcome is so terrible. There is Padmés funeral scene that leaves the viewer space to mourn, and the scenes with the twins and their surrogate families announcing that not all is lost. “Rogue One” just makes a quick cut when all is said and done and that’s it.

No one will ever think about these persons ever again, no one will mourn them, no one will be grateful to them or call them heroes. A brutally honest take on war and rebellion, opposite to the end of “A New Hope” where the heroes are celebrated and seen as such, though they are responsible for the death of everybody who lived on the Death Star. (Not that I’m blaming them, in that situation it was either destroy them or be destroyed.)

Luke Skywalker, hero of the first classic film which directly follows after this one, never knew his parents, lost his foster parents and his mentor during the course of a few days, but he joined the Rebellion and thrived on it. For Jyn, the loss of her family is a dead weight which hangs on her shoulders until it leads to her death. Jyn merely survives, making one heavy step after the other; she never rebels and goes her own way like Luke did.

I was also surprised since I had heard that Jyn was supposed to be a strong-willed woman, designed to be a role model to female spectators. I wouldn’t want any girl to choose Jyn as a personal example to go by: she is a cold, cynical person whose life never knows fulfilment, not a symbol of hope but of relinquishing of life, hope, happiness.

Her characterization is particularly bitter when we compare her to Han Solo, to whom Star War’s second spin-off was dedicated two years later. Though Han has a sarcastic streak, he remains generous and humorous, and he always cares and is cared about by someone. Despite his name, he is never really alone: he bonds with Qi’Ra, Chewbacca, Lando and Enfys Nest, while Jyn never is close to anyone. (Is it a coincidence that the names “Han” and “Jyn” are so alike, I wonder?)

Also contrarily to Jyn, Han turns his back on his father figure Beckett, deciding to go his own way. And in both cases, this attitude is not heroic in the conventional sense, but personal; Jyn does her father’s will because she feels committed to him, not to some greater cause. Han, too, rejects Beckett when he feels personally betrayed and let down by him. No wonder Han, as we get to know him in the classic films, is the most independent and worldly-wise of the characters. He initially had no father figure, then he found one but in the end, he chose to do without him. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence, when Han kills Beckett in self-defense, that his last words are “You made a wise choice”.

The difference between Han and Jyn, or also Luke, Anakin and Rey, to name other Star Wars heroes, is that he doesn’t have a father figure but he also doesn’t look out for one. He gladly befriends Beckett who is more experienced than he, but when he finds he can’t trust him he turns his back on him, with regret but not mourning him for long.

Han never knew where he came from, but with that also came the freedom to make his own choices; and as we know, contrarily to Jyn he still had a long and fulfilling life and found real friends, a home and a purpose. Very fittingly, “Solo - a Star Wars Story” is a feelgood film and not in the least depressing.

In both cases, we have a very realistic and not at all starry-eyed outlook on what “heroism” and “fighting for a just cause” means. Star Wars remains true to itself by hammering home all over again that it is not at all gratifying to be a lonely hero, and that on the other hand having a family may be a good thing, but being defined by them is a crushing burden. Picking up that burden and doing what you believe you have to do in order to feel connected to them may lead to the desired end, but then the question arises whether that end is really so desirable if the cost is so high. Again, Star Wars is not about the good guys blowing up the bad guys, but about growing up.

Luke Skywalker never knew about his family for a very long time, and after he had learned about it his father died, leaving it to him to repair the damage Vader had caused together with Palpatine; and as we see him again in “The Last Jedi” his character shows a bitter parallel to Jyn - lonely and disillusioned. This also follows the line of the Prequels: even if you have the best intentions you may still err, and deciding to give your life to what you perceive as a higher cause may literally become your, not exactly happy, fate. Becoming a Jedi master Luke became emotionally detached, which brought to the downfall of his temple; only when he communicated with someone again - Rey, Yoda, Leia, and also with his nephew a little - his existence gained new purpose.

In his last moments, Luke announces that he will still be there as a Force spirit; and after death he is remembered by many people in the galaxy, whether they knew him personally or not.

Jyn and Cassian die in the blaze of the Death Star fire, giving up what little they still had or were; Luke’s death is illuminated by the light of the twin suns which this time rise instead of setting. He loved and was loved, that is why he will never be truly gone. Jyn, Cassian and the other members of the Rogue One mission are forgotten, despite the invaluable service they did to the galaxy at large. This is what “Rogue One” ultimately is about: complete, utter and inescapable loneliness.

So, thank you for the food for thought, “Rogue One”. But I don’t think I will watch you ever again.

#star wars #rogue one #jyn erso #cassian andor #han solo #death star #film analysis

17 notes · View notes

theinquisitivej · 6 years

Text

Review Variety Pack: Singers, Vampires, and Autopsies

When you write reviews, there are some weeks where there’s simply nothing on the schedule that grabs your interest or sparks any ideas that you feel compelled to write down. Then there are the times where you have the opposite problem, and you end up watching more than enough content to fill two or three articles, and you just don’t know what to pick. When this happens, I’m often torn between my desire to cover everything I see to produce more content and talk about as many different things with my readers as physically possible, and the practical limitation of only having so much time each week to properly go into extensive detail of what I’ve seen. Well, on this occasion, I thought I would try something a little different and take a quick look at a couple films and a TV series rather than dedicate an entire article to just one of them. Don’t worry, I’ll be back to the more in-depth format for my reviews soon enough. For now, this approach just allows me to catch up on some of the content I’ve been meaning to talk about, as well as point you all in the direction of a couple of items. There may even be one or two which have flown under the radar for you.

‘A Star is Born’

Okay, so maybe not ALL of these are smaller projects that haven’t received a lot of media attention. But whatever – the deal with this movie is that Bradley Cooper decided to direct the latest in what has apparently been a long line of remakes and adaptations of the 1937 movie A Star is Born. Cooper plays a popular male singer who discovers a young woman with a talent for singing, played by Lady Gaga, who he wants to introduce to the world and drama ensues as they start a relationship and her fame keeps growing. I have no familiarity with the original or any of the other three remakes listed on Wikipedia, so take that for whatever it’s worth when I say I’m glad I saw this film.

The 2018 A Star is Born seems to be made with the knowledge that the audience has likely heard this song before. Even if you’re like me and you haven’t seen any of the four previous versions of this film, the rise-to-stardom story is so well-established that it’s a safe bet that you’ll recognise many of the typical story beats of this kind of film. You see the future star’s humble origins, their soaring debut, their optimism for their bright future, them getting signed on for a record label and a soulless manager character entering the picture, their image having to be changed as they get pushed further into the public eye, someone close to them criticising them because they believe the star has lost their way, one of the characters taking a bad turn as it starts to feel like the star has lost all control of their life, and so on. It’s a story we know, but A Star is Born appears to be conscious of this fact. Towards the end of the film, there’s a conversation where a character reflects on how the same notes are repeated over and over between different songs. The character remarks that it’s in the different ways that people see those notes and interpret them through their music that new experiences are created.

And I think that’s what this film does. The story may be similar to half a dozen other examples, but the execution is what engages. There’s a naturalistic direction to the film that you can see through the way characters talk over each other as they conduct their conversations, or the slight documentary-style to the cinematography, or the minimal use of non-diegetic music which makes the soundtrack seem as if it’s coming from the characters themselves as they sing and play throughout the story. This increases the sense of impact to some of the events within the story because the film is selling you on the impression that what you’re seeing is really happening. On top of that, Lady Gaga’s experience as a professional singer not only enables her to sing well throughout the film, but it also helps her to convey the emotions and thought processes being experienced by her character as she sings. She’s able to deliver a dramatic performance alongside her musical performance, and that’s compelling to watch.

The 2018 version of A Star is Born is not telling a new story, but it manages to tell a familiar narrative in a way that manages to be distinctive and emotionally affecting. If any of the people involved make the film of interest to you, or if the mood takes you and you want to experience a decent version of this sort of rising-star story, then this version of A Star is Born is a decent pick. Now I just have to watch Bohemian Rhapsody and see if the other film about musical celebrities currently out in cinemas does as good a job at hitting its marks.

Final Score: Bronze / Silver

‘Castlevania’ Season 2

Castlevania is one of those franchises that, on first inspection, appears to have a complicated history with dozens of instalments all coming together to form this grand tapestry telling the story of the war between Dracula, destined to reincarnate every 100 years, and the Belmonts, a family of vampire hunters that have dedicated their entire lineage to keeping Dracula and his forces of darkness at bay. And for fans who want to read into it, that expansive timeline is absolutely there, but on a very simple level, every Castlevania game more or less tells the same story. Dracula shows up along with his huge labyrinthine castle, and someone with a whip and a bunch of vampire-hunting equipment rocks up to kick him back into his coffin. Sometimes there are other characters along for the ride to make it slightly more complicated, but that’s the general gist. Also, there’s always some excellent music accompanying the proceedings.

The first season of the Netflix animated series Castlevania adapted the story of the third game in the series. As it was only four 20-minute episodes, the first season is barely longer than a feature-length movie, and just as it finds its purpose and you feel like you’re getting into it, it ends. It wasn’t anything more than a semi-decent series, but I felt like there was potential when I watched it last year. The animation during the scenes where characters are simply talking to one another was stiff and you’d only see characters shift in place after a sentence or two, rather than exhibit more natural, flowing movement from moment-to-moment. But the action scenes were clearly where the animation budget went, as fights were creative and choreographed with a satisfying flair which showcased the animator’s passion for the source material. Performances were suitably brooding and at the right level between genuine human levels of emotion and melodramatic excessiveness, which is fitting for something Gothic and cheesy like this. At times the excessive gore and general revelling in shock-factor violence grated on me, and none of the characters really captured my interest or felt like I could get behind them until the second half of the last episode.

Now Season 2 of Castlevania doesn’t fix all of my issues with the previous season, but I am very happy with some of the progress I’ve seen so far. I haven’t finished the season yet, as I’m six episodes in and have two left before I’m done, but I’ve seen enough to say that the extra time has benefitted the writers, allowing them to take the time to further explore characters and focus on conversations and interactions between the different members of the cast. The result is a more satisfying and complete-feeling season.

Apart from that, my thoughts are more or less the same as the first season. I like their presentation of the series’ established Gothic aesthetic through the impressive backgrounds and character design. I enjoy seeing characters and references from the games and think the showrunners are doing a great job at translating the tone of the games to an ongoing TV series. The excessive gore is a little much at times, and not because I can’t handle it, but because it feels inelegant and unnecessary when they’re already doing such a good job at establishing a Gothic atmosphere. I am enjoying the characters more, even though the attempts at humour feel a little awkward (though I think that’s part of the intentional style of the series, so take that for what it’s worth). All in all, a solid series that has gotten better since last year, but still has several areas in which it could improve. If you enjoy the original games or are a fan of cheesy Gothic fantasy, then give it a watch.

Final Score: Copper / Bronze

‘The Autopsy of Jane Doe’

Watching this 2016 horror movie from André Øvredal, the director of Trollhunter, was how I spent Halloween this year, and it was a night well spent. A father-son pair of coroners are given an unidentified body of a woman that was found on a crime scene and are tasked with finding a cause-of-death by morning so that the local sheriff can give a full statement on the matter. As they proceed with the autopsy, they find more and more things which don’t add up. There are signs of things happening to the body which don’t make scientific sense when you consider the body’s appearance, and to top it off, there’s an uneasy atmosphere around the office as things just don’t feel right. And from there, I’ll keep you in the dark, as one of the most enjoyable elements to watching this film for the first time is trying to work out what’s going on alongside the two main characters as they dig further into this mystery.

The Autopsy of Jane Doe got under my skin because it taps into the uneasiness you often feel when you’re stuck in an office or medical building late at night and you’re one of the only people remaining. It makes effective use of space to create a suffocating feeling to the autopsy room and the one or two other spaces our characters find themselves in as the film goes on. The use of the right-angled corridor to create suspense as you fear what might come around the corner is commendable. Both of the two main actors, Brian Cox as the father and Emile Hirsch as the son, work well in their roles, selling you on their close, familial relationship as well as the fact that they are professional coroners, so they know what to do and how to handle their nerves around a dead body, but they’re also human enough to get a little uneasy when things start looking weird.

As I touched on earlier, I was really drawn in by the set-up to The Autopsy of Jane Doe, fascinated to learn more as conflicting pieces of information are revealed to both the characters and the audience. It’s an exciting sensation that I think is unique to horror; it’s the human urge to find out more even when all signs are telling you that you should stop delving into this unsettling area. You have to know the truth and understand what’s going on, even when it takes you to deadly territory. It’s such a recurring feeling that I experience when watching horror, as well as see in the motivations of the characters within horror narratives, that I consider the horror and mystery genres to be close relatives. The Autopsy of Jane Doe is dripping with that sense of horrific mystery as it centres on an autopsy, a procedure that is done when you want to find out the truth behind something but is also inherently unsettling as you are staring face-to-face at death, in all its detail.

This horror movie has a great premise which is executed with impressive technical ability by its actors, cinematographer, and director (even if it leans on the jump-scare tactic a little too much). For those who like their horror with an air of mystery, then this is a hard recommend.

Final Score: Silver

#The Inquisitive J #Film Review #film #movies #film critic #movie critic #critic #reviews #television review #netflix castlevania #castlevania #a star is born #a star is born 2018 #the autopsy of jane doe #netflix castlevania review #a star is born review #the autopsy of jane doe review #the inquisitive j reviews

1 note · View note