Incredible Shrinking Woman (1981) Thanksgiving Turkey

From it’s release THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING WOMAN has divided audiences. Some people loved the satire of consumerism and Science fiction and some people didn’t. I know the films reception kind of short circuited Lily Tomlin’s attempt at being a leading actress.

The film has housewife Tomlin beginning to shrink as a result of being exposed to everyday chemicals.  As she shrinks she becomes a celebrity. Some mad scientists kidnap her hoping to find away to shrink humanity.

While the film made money, the film was a critical disaster. Critics hated it.  While the critical opinion has changed over the years the film has remained a footnote in everyone’s career.

I saw it in a packed theater the opening weekend and I thought it was just okay. I thought, and still do, it was trying to do too much. I think it sacrifices laughs for making a point. I’m also not a fan of the look of the film. It has muted images with pastel colors, and it just feels wrong. I mean really wrong. It feels like an odd dream or as if we are watching a film that was damaged.

While the film made money I don’t think it really helped anyone’s career, though director Joel Schumacher skated on to a great career afterward (BATMAN AND ROBIN among others).

The question you are probably asking is why is this in this series of Turkeys if it made money. The reason is it’s a lost film of sorts. Time and tide pushed it aside.  It’s a film no one really talks about, or even really likes, I mean it’s okay, but that’s as far as it goes. In its way it’s a cinematic misfire. It was loaded into theaters, made a noise when the trigger was pulled and then went nowhere.

Is it worth seeing? As a footnote for everyone involved, but I would be hard pressed to give you a reason beyond that, it isn’t really funny, and its points were obvious even 40 years ago.

Slapstick of Another Kind (1982/84) Thanksgiving Turkey

Sometime about 1980 Steven Paul was being eyed as perhaps the next big director. Not even twenty years old he made the film FALLING IN LOVE AGAIN with Elliot Gould, Susannah York and a a very young Michelle Pfieffer in a romantic comedy midlife crisis film. It wasn't bad (and it wasn't great)  but Hollywood was curious since Paul could schmooze big stars and execs and somehow he managed to convince them into making a film version of Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick with Jerry Lewis, Madeline Kahn, Pat Morita, Samuel Fuller and Marty Feldman. 

In the days before the internet the film was heavily hyped and was being groomed as the next big thing...and then it was delayed, recut and dumped into theaters. Steven Paul barely directed anything again and instead went into producing and management.

This was one of a group of big studio bombs that  were due to release in 1981/82 (And Which I will be covering this week).  HEARTBEEPS with Andy Kaufman and Bernadette Peters, THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING WOMAN with Lilly Tomlin and couple of others were heavily pushed and all died at the box office (or at least with audiences on the back end because we never discuss them) in spectacular fashion. It was a time where you didn't know what you were going to get the first weekend because the studios could control word of mouth.

SLAPSTICK was a head scratcher from the first. Vonnegut's least favorite novel being turned into a film starring a man whose only attachment to the public at the time were his telethon appearances and his old cult films. No offense to Lewis, but other than his being a name, why was he chosen? More to the point what made the studio want to release it or investors want to throw away money we'll never know.

The plot has two twins played by Lewis and Kahn, who apart are idiots but together are highly intelligent and if they touch are super intelligent. It transpires that they are actually aliens sent to solve the world's problems, however they are so brilliant that humanity can't deal with them. (Oh, and the Chinese have all been shrunk to two inches and cut themselves off from the world)

Words can't really do this film justice.

This is some sort of bent fever dream of a film that has you wondering how it got made. This isn't a small budget inde film, but a bigger budgeted film with real stars. It's nominally an off kilter film from a mainstream company.

To me the film was doomed from the start. It looks off from the first frame and it never remotely feels connected to reality, even its own. Vonnegut's worlds are slightly off but you buy them because his words are so good. The filmmakers who have made good/great films from his work understand this and keep things tethered. Steven Paul never does and he lets it go wild. Lewis is allowed to mug for the camera. Kahn seems lost. This is like watching a road accident where bizarre clown cars designed by four year olds crash into each other explode.

Nothing works. It's just awful  

In all honesty it's so f-ed up that any cinephile worth their salt should see it, just so they can see about where cinematic hell starts and what it really entails.

It's so bad you completely understand why it took a decade for Steven Paul to direct another film-and it will explain why some of the films he produced aren't very good.

Rumours (2024) NYFF 2024

Guy Maddin, Evan Johnson, and Galen Johnson tell the story of a G7 meeting during a looming crisis and the weird things that happen as they try to write a draft statement about the events. 

A great cast including Cate Blanchett and Charles Dance chew the scenery in silly look at end of the world. It's a crazy film that doesn't really make any sense, but survives because the cast makes it worth watching.

At the press screening I attended the reaction was mixed. Some people liked it and some people didn't. The argument against the film was that there really wasn't much here. And to be honest I can see that, it is ultimately a shaggy dog tale with a wicked sting in the tale about the uselessness of our leaders, but I liked it. 

If you are a fan of the cast or the directors it's worth a look 

Brief thoughts on THE PARTY'S OVER (2024) Toronto 2024

 

A Senegalese woman tries to sneak into Spain. Caught on the beach by police, she breaks free and ends up hiding in the garden of large home. The woman living there takes her in, but there are complications.

Comedy of manners and biting social commentary mix in a look at how we see each other. It’s a frequently amusing tale that, while not always successful (it’s a bit too obvious in the points it’s making) does entertain.

I don’t have much to say beyond that.

Poor Things (2023) opens Friday

Yorgos Lanthimos version of Alasdair Gray's novel is the current front runner for the Oscars. Set in a steam punk version of the 19th century the film tells the story of Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), a young woman who was resurrected by  Dr Godwin Baxter (Wilem Dafoe). We watch a as Bella goes from being a child and turns into a woman. Told with Lanthimos' sense of bent reality and silliness the film is destined to be talked about for decades.

I liked this film. Its a hell of story that seems scattershot for a while until it starts to pull itself together into a deeply moving story. It's also a film that is weakened by some of the choices the director made.

 

The problems with the film are largely do to Lanthimos' choice of always being off kilter. He insists on playing a lot of this for laughs, and while its very funny, it frequently under cuts the emotion. There is a point where the silliness should have fallen away. I should have gotten misty not giggly at the end. It's not fatal, but it is lessening.

Additionally the film has a couple of bumps in it;s construction. There is a tendency to repeat certain tropes over and over (Bella's customers for example- we don't need to see as many as we do) and at other times details are left out or are unclear (Where was the ship going since its headed to Athens, ends up in Alexandria and the couple are dumped in Marseilles) don't get enough time with certain characters- particularly those who knew Bella when she was Victoria. 

Of course most people won't care, they will simply love the certain to be award winning delights.

This film is going to win almost every technical award under the sun. The world the film creates is magical. The costumes and in particular the sets are just pure joy. The moment when we get to Lisbon and see that we aren't in our world is one of the truly great reveals in cinema. 

The performances are going to dominate the acting awards.  Dafoe, Ruffalo and especially Stone are certain to be nominated if not win every award.  Stone's performance is beyond words. It's an arc of a life and I have no idea how she fashioned it, especially if this wasn't filmed in order. How did she know which degree she needed to be at? It's destined to be a career defining performance.

The real reason that the film works is because of the  spine of the script. The tale of a woman growing up and becoming her true self is a strong one. Its one that we can relate to because in its way it is the arc of our lives. The fable like quality to the details (say having people who want us to be something we are no loner) is  what makes it so universal. This is a script whose construction will be studied.

You all should see this film because it;s really good- though be warned it is full of sex and graphic gore.

(Addendum- Hubert Vigilla has suggested that POOR THINGS should be double featured with BARBIE and he is absolutely right)

John Woo's action satire Silent Night (2023) is a dog

This is an almost dialogless film about a father trying to avenge his son's death on Christmas Eve on the Christmas Eve of the following year.  This is an over the top, overly melodramatic to a ridiculous degree look at what might happen if a regular guy went out for revenge.

Not to mince words, John Woo's latest is an action movie satire and it is really bad. It's bad from the first frames as Joel Kinnaman is seen running in close up slow motion in a blood soaked sweater after the gang bangers who shot his son- except its clear he is running in place because the background never changes position.

Sending up all his cliches in the worst possible way, Woo has SILENT NIGHT play out  like some lesser talent was trying to make a spoof of a John Woo film but fell on their face. Yes, the film is funny, but for all the wrong reasons. We laugh at the film not with it.

Even worse is the fact that most of it is horribly dull with nothing compelling happening after the opening shoot out  until the one hour mark. After that it's just over the top nonsense and riffs on Woo tropes. Actually after the opening it's a silly recovery, a flashback to the  kid's death and silly training for 50 minutes of screen time before a brief fight, then another dead quarter hour before the action starts for real.It's painful. 

What happened to Woo's sense of pacing? He made the 5 hour masterpiece RED CLIFF and the almost as long THE CROSSING, and they never felt as long as this hour and forty five minute stinker.

Joel Kinnaman is awful. His whole performance is just mugging for the camera. He is so bad that it could be one of the worst performances in action film history. This is the kind of performance that I've seen kill a career. I find it odd since he was so good in other action roles (Rick Flagg in Suicide Squad and Robocop). The  creme de la creme  of his badness are his frequent sequences where he is missing his dead son showing us a mushy doe eyed fake sadness. The performance had me going WTF out loud  repeatedly.

I'm at a loss as to what Woo was doing with this film. I've never seen him make this many bad choices. I understand why our hero never speaks, he was shot in the throat, but the fact we only hear two whispered lines from his wife and radio broadcasts makes little sense. Yes I know it's a conceit but it's a bad one. Also bad is Woo allowing his action director to make almost all the car related sequences play out similarly. 

This film is just a huge misfire. It's such a big one that I don't want to know why Woo made this for the John Wick producers, I just want to flush this film down the toilet and then move on to the next thing. 

To be honest if you come in an hour and three minutes into the film and just watch the last 45 minutes of action you are probably going to like it. Yea, the action sequences have some shitty bits in them, and the melodrama is silly, but it's weirdly compelling, in a crappy action movie sort of a way. (Honestly this film was made for streaming because the film has no dialog you  can actually scan through most of the first hour and not miss anything. If this film develops any positive reputation it's going to be with people who scan through it)

Avoid this film unless you must see John Woo's worst film.

Empire V (2023) Screamfest 2023

In an age where the war with Ukraine has caused Russian films to be effectively removed from world cinemas, it would seem odd that EMPIRE V is getting a world wide release until you realize that the Russian government banned it and a couple  of it’s stars is in trouble for  criticizing the war and one being declared foreign agent. Having seen the film I completely understand why the Russians are pissed since whatever you think of the film as a whole, the film is a scathing satiric takedown of the Russian ruling class.

The film is a reimagining of vampires. They are made when a “tongue” a worm like creature is transferred into a human. This gives the person all sorts of powers. While they do need blood, they can eat other things. Additionally they can go out into the light.

The film follows a Roman, young man who is given a tongue by Brahama, a dying vampire. By doing so the old guy will in someway carry on in some way since the tongue allows you to share memories. Inheriting Brahama’s fortune Roman, is trained in what he has to do an how to survive with his new abilities. Along the way he learns about the real overlords of the world (hence the banning by the Russians).

A visually stunning, EMPIRE V is a big screen movie. Almost every shot has something to delight the eyes. In most cases the images are not just eye candy but something that help propel the film forward. The world of the vampires is like our own, only with more bling.

The narrative is good, but one has the sense that  it is trying to do too much into little time. Feeling like the first film in a series (which will never happen thanks to the ban at home) the film suffers from trying to explain a bit too much. Unlike other films that try something similar it isn’t fatal it just takes the edge off slightly. On the other hand it may not seem as bad on the next viewing.

Despite the minor flaws I liked EMPIRE V. It’s largely a lot of fun- and it gets a lot of bonus points for setting up a world we’ve never seen a hundred times before.

Worth a look.

Do Not Expect Too Much From the End of the World (2023) NYFF 2023

Radu Jude (Last at NYFF with BAD LUCK BANGING OR LOONY PORN) is a back...and if you liked his earlier films you'll possibly like this and if you didn't stay away.

The film follows a girl named Angela as she goes through her day as a production assistant. She is scouting locations, filming people who were hurt on the job for an upcoming film, and doing her errands as she sits in traffic and drives around. At the same time Jude intercuts life of this Angela with that of another girl named Angela from a 1983 communist film traveling in the same locations.

How you react to Jude's sense of humor and his love of long takes where nothing happens will determine if you like this film or not. If they click great, if not you'll get up and leave.

His sense of humor is such that he has Angela talk about how in America you can buy all the guns you want at a grocery store and that if buy a bazooka they'll send a machine gun to Ukraine. He starts off with a poke in the eye about how the world sees America, which he pushes too far and neuters the jab (it ends up a nerf ball and not a stick).  A lot of the satire is like that, obvious points pushed too far. It might have worked but the writing isn't as clever as it thinks it is.

The other problem is Jude loves the long take. Some directors can make it work, but I've never found that Jude has been able to pull it off. In his previous film BAD LUCK BANGING he had one of his characters wandering across a city for no real reason for the better part of an hour for no real purpose. While there is nothing as long as that in this film there are numerous sequences where I don't know why they are running so long. The sequences could have been trimmed.  (There is no reason the needs to be almost 3 hours long)

To be honest as with Jude's other films, if he trimmed it down it would be the winner it could of been  and not the bore it actually is.

DUDE BRO PARTY MASSACRE III releases Friday on VOD

If you grew up on bad horror films from the 1980's this film will make you nostalgic as you doubled over in hysterical laughter.

The film is set up as a home video recording of a film allegedly lost to time. The film was supposedly banned by order of President Reagan, but saved because some one recorded a late night TV showing. The film follows what happens when the twin brother of one of the characters in the earlier films (which don't exist) switches colleges and pledges at his brothers old fraternity in the hopes of catching his brother's killer- a deadly woman known as Motherface. Motherface wiped out two previous groups of frat boys partying in the woods.

This is a send up of every slasher film and pretty much every horror cliche you can think of.that came out of the 1980's. Having suffered through way too many of the films its sending up I spent a good amount of time doubled over in laughter as I watched the mayhem unfold. They got it note perfect.

To be honest when the film started and the films retro shot on home video look came on to the screen I was groaning because I suspected that this was going to be one of those films that thought it was clever, but wasn't. I figured it was going to use degraded video imagery to cover up all sorts of flaws. I thought it would be rife with errors and attempts at making things seem old, Instead the film started to get all of the the little things right. The film looks and feels like an 80's film filtered through a modern lens. Other than the an occasional out of place line, the film is dead on, including a joke about not saying Fuck (which is a riff on a joke in a 1981 film called STUDENT BODIES). Yes there is a silliness to the performances, but if you've seen what they are sending up they aren't that far off. (and hell they even bring in some stars (Patton Oswalt, Nina Hartley and Larry King) for fleeting cameos)

The film is a a bloody delight. Blood and body parts flow copiously, always to laughable effect. People don't bleed they shoot geysers of blood. And no one dies normally, they die in ridiculous manners.

This is one of the funniest horror comedies in years.

If the film has any flaw it's that 102 minutes the film kind of runs out of steam.

Absolutely a must see for horror fans and for those who love to laugh and don't mind gore.

THE KILLING ROMANCE (2023) NYAFF 2023 Fantasia 2023

Famous actress marries a controlling billionaire after one of her movies tanks. Seven years later his controlling nature and refusal to let her restart her career fester she decides to try and kill him. Enlisting the a fan who lives next door she tries to make it a reality only to find it all go sideways.

Semi-musical comedy noir satire is something you will love or hate. According to the post screening Q&A the film was so divisive of audiences in Korea it ended up losing money. I can completely understand that since some bits of the film play better than others. Indeed just as the film pulls it all together  near the end, it almost instantly loses it’s way with a couple of WTF turns.

While I freely admit the film was over sold to me going in, I did like the film. I don’t think I would have been over the moon regardless because I found it so uneven.

Actually the problem with the film is that according to the Q&A this “light” semi musical comedy started out life as a very dark domestic violence tale that was so dark director Lee Won-suk didn’t think he could handle it as written and lightened it up. The problem is that the character of Jonathan, though played for laughs, is still one of the most vile screen villains and a number of turns really aren’t funny, especially when you consider this was supposed to be a serious film. (And while I found out it was supposed to be serious after the fact, I was still bothered by turns.)

My reservations aside the film is worth seeing, especially if you want a film that isn’t like anything else.

Once Upon A Time in the Future: 2121 (2022) Fantaspoa 2023

In a future where mankind has been driven underground due to war and environmental destruction the young control society. As new children are brought into the world old folks are eliminated. When a family unit is expecting a new baby things begin to change.

Polemical science fiction film seems more like a selection of dystopian greatest hits than anything that has is its own thing. Its a film where the world it is creating doesn't feel real but more something that was cobbled together in order to get it's point across. (Adam and Eve, Logan's Run, THX1138)

I'm personally trying to figure out what that point is. 

On some level this would have played better on a stage than as a film. On stage we would have been willing to forgive more of the bumps because we fall into the events that are happening right before us. In a film we need some sort of reality created for the film to work since it's not right there before us. We never get a real world here.

While not bad, it's just never compelling, and my feeling is if this had to be a film , it would have been better as a short since it could have moved faster and not given us time to think.

Origin of Evil (2022) Rendezvous With French Cinema 2023

A woman decides to leave the factory where she is working and make amends with her billionaire father, not realizing she will have to contend with the family he has put together since she left.

Genre bending film is one part family drama, one part social commentary, one part thriller and one part black comedy. It's a film with a great deal on its mind. There are some knowing laughs mixed in with the poison which makes for a frequently fun ride.

If you haven't guessed, everyone in the family has an angle and what is going on and who is who seems to be changable depending upon the latest revelation. This fact makes it hard to really discuss what is going on lest bits be revealed too soon.

I liked the film a great deal, though to be honest seeing the film in the middle of all of the excellent thrillers playing Lincoln Center's Rendezvous With French Cinema has me scheduling a revist down the road where I can see it for itself.

Recommended

Lion Vs The Little People (2022)

Being promoted by having a single screening  with a limited number of seat so it's the smallest release in UK history, LION VS LITTLE PEOPLE is a film I will be wrestling with for a long time. This is a brilliant faux documentary that says a great deal about a lot of things but has an intentional uneven tone that kind of undercuts the serious points it's making.

The film is a recounting of an "Internet Myth" about an alleged fight between a lion and 40 little people. Before we get to the fight and its aftermath we follow the story of the documentarian takes as he unravels the story which follows a super rich mogul who parleys a media empire into a sports betting super fortune and real life gladiatorial fights.

Bookended by statements about the way Little People are portrayed in the media, the film is at times a solid look at what people of a smaller stature have to endure, especially if they are actors. You completely understand how the actors could have ended up in a situation like this. This film is a brilliant look at how society pigeon holes various groups.

Actually the film has a great deal to say about a lot of things. It lays out a perfectly believable tale about how someone with money can run rough shod over people, rising to his own level of incompetence. It';s also a damning look at the baser  nature of humanity as the bread and circus of real life combat escalates into ugliness. Its also a pointed take down of thing on the internet.

When the film is not throwing out out of place jokes this film is actually one of the best films I've seen in 2022. As a faux documentary that uses the form to examine society it is so spot on that if you didn't know better you would swear it was all real, thanks in large part to performances that sell everything we are seeing. It may not be real but it is damn close and we are better for it.

The problem with the film is that director Raphael Warner periodically throws out a line that breaks the mood and wrecks the tone. Making jokes about one characters suicide being a reaction to his wife's femininity isn't really funny and completely out of place. There are several  jokes like that crash not only because they are bad but also because they don't fit. they hurt a pointed satire that, with out them, is one of the best films of 2022. Thinking about it I don't know if Warner was aware of what a good film he was making  because if he did I don't think he'd have undercut himself as he does.

Despite what you think going in this film (mostly) rocks. Its a thoughtful film that will make you think about a lot of serious subjects (acceptance, out of control rich people, internet nastiness) we are dealing with on a daily basis and don't seriously ponder enough.

Recommended.

In a Valley of Violence (2016)

Ti West's western is a serious examination of revenge and violence when a drifters dog is killed and decides to get revenge on the three men  who did it, something that escalates into even more violence.

Violence begets violence and everyone behave badly in a film where there really isn't any good guys, just degrees of badness. While we tend to side wit Ethan Hawke's drifter even he isn't with out blame stealing a priests mule and behaving badly. Of course there are extenuating circumstances but even so it makes for an uncomfortable mix.

I vaguely remember this film coming and going from theaters back in 2016  but I didn't remember much about it other tan that. Sitting and catching on its run on HBO I was kind of taken aback since tonally the film is all over the place, one minute its  western, the next it sees to be sending the genre up and the next it's a morality tale with thoughts on revenge. The near climatic shoot out in the street wit John Tavolta in the middle is oddly funny and oddly not, writer/director West is clearly making a point about how the need to fill a blood lust will leave everyone dead. Its an impressive moment that kind of highlights the film's all over nature which I'm guessing many people unsure of what to make of the film and hence the much too low IMDB score of  six point something.

An impressive film this is something to search out especially if you don't want your typical western shoot'em up

Razzennest (2022) Fantastic Fest 2022 Burnt Ends

 

This spoof of commentary tracks and art film pretensions is a five minute sketch dragged out to 81.

The idea is that an ill prepared moderator talks to a pretentious director and his crew while we watch his film which is made up of shots of buildings and nature. Names are mispronounced. Referential jokes are made about films and Broadway (A Hamilton one is groaner). The voice acting is done in a loud forced broad style that suggest inexperience at acting.

This is one of the worst films of the year and certain to be on the replay list in hell.

The problems with the film are many. 

Having mentioned the voice acting I’ll continue by saying the problem is that the commentary is not like any sort of commentary track you would ever hear. I know it’s supposed to be a spoof, but spoofs work best when you keep things close to the way things are, but having someone so ill prepared from the start would never happen.   While I could see, and have seen, something like that at a festival, it would never be something on a commentary track because no film company would dare put it out. Yes I know it’s supposed to be a commend, but it’s not really funny.

Another problem with the film is that the filmmakers really don’t seem to understand what films like this are. Yes the visual part of the film is close to any number of the hundreds of similar films that have played in the experimental or Avant Garde  sections of festivals like New York (actually as an assemblage of image it’s actually really good) however the pretensions that the pretend director imbues the film with are unlike anything that I’ve ever run across. In the half century I’ve spent watching films I’ve never seen an actual discussion like occurs in this film. Yes they are sending up pretentious filmmakers but they are doing so in a way that Hollywood does in throw away gags.  I’ve spent the last decade plus seeing bad art films and talking to pretentious directors and I’ve never seen anyone be this over the top pretentious. As I said this is so over the top as to only work as a throw away. Frankly Roger Debris in The Producers is a better representation of real pomposity.

I think  all the jokes are not funny. A collection of half thought out maybe funny in a vacuum  japes, they never land. I sat there listening and not reacting other than to groan at a riff that was just bad or to check my watch to see when this was over.

And what absolutely kills the film is that   Mystery Science 3000, Riff Trax and The Mads exist. For decades  and decades the group of movie riffers that spun off from MST3K have been deflating cinema pomposity with seeming ease.  They have taken down films of every sort – including films of the sort that this film is attempting spoof  - and made them funny. They are so good at it that that very few people have managed to riff/spoof with any success.  There is a reason that there is a niche around them and not really anywhere else.  Knowing that MST3K and there extended family exist and are doing this sort of thing for real we are left to wonder why we should bother with a bad imitation of a riff of a fake film? I have no answer 

Rageaholic (2022) is a must see.

A loose canon cop is sent to  New York in order to get treatment for his violent tendencies. When he returns he finds the city has changed.  Societal rules are being ruthlessly enforced. Those who cross the line are ending up dead.  What is the dark secret behind it all.

If you do not like blood, gore and graphic violence stay away. I mean seriously stay away. This is not an idle warning since a couple of things in this film had me looking away and groaning. Yea some of it is cathartic in a good way its still stomach churning. I say that now because what I have to say next might make you want to see the film.

This film kicks ass. 

It is in it's way a masterpiece of social commentary about the evils of polite society. It's a blood brother to Kubrick's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE with it's updated look how the powerful will try control of the outsider. It's also a biting commentary on the ugliness and bullshit hiding behind the face of polite society. In all seriousness this scrappy little film has more to say that any other narrative that I've seen this year. Comedy and violence aside there is enough going on that this is going to end up being taught in film classes in a few years.

As complex as the film is thematically the reality is that everyone is going to be coming to the film for other reasons. The films technical end, the visuals and the structure of the film are going to delight people who love a film crafted at the highest level.  The comedy is going to delight those who can appreciate both sly wit and low brow humor. And then there is the violence, the literal bone crushing, blood splattering violence  which will delight the action fans and blood hounds. I loved it all.

What delighted me is that the film is so carefully crafted that while the film looks low brow and rough, it isn't. Director Yoshiki Takahashi, has crafted a film that works on numerous levels  beginning with putting us in a world with a tactile feel of reality. AT the same time it also adds to the effect of the violence. The fights feel real, not carefully choreographed. We wince because what happens is real, with most of the violence taking people down in one or two shots. Takahashi also crafts the story in such a way that the violence is such that we are wincing , forcing us to ponder if violence is the answer, even as we are cheering  with cathartic release  at the bad guys going down.

 I'm sorry if I am rambling but there is so much here and I need another couple of viewings to do it justice, however there isn't enough time to do so and get this up in a timely manner.

Highly recommended-this is a must see when it starts playing around the world and in a cinema near you (the film just opened in Japan Thursday)

What To Do With The Dead Kaiju (2022) Fantasia 2022

 

WHAT TO DO WITH THE DEAD KAIJU? Was near the top of my must see list for Fantasia. I was curious to see what filmmakers were going to do with the obvious question, what do they people do with dead giant monsters after the battles in various films. It was a question that I wanted answered, kind of like wanting to know what happens after a superhero battle in the comics (Marvel answered that with Damage Control)

In WHAT TO DO the action picks up after the rampaging monster was killed by a mysterious light from the sky. As everyone rejoices, the government tries to deduce if the beast is indeed dead.  Once they realize he is, they then have to figure out what to do. Tourism is a possibility. As other solutions are suggested, it's realized that corpse is decaying and that trapped inside its tough hide gasses are building up and it could explode sending flesh and toxic gases everywhere. It now becomes a rush to solve the problem.

This is an interesting, if messy, comedy satire that sends up all sorts of kaiju related films. Its focus on bureaucracy makes it a direct riff on SHIN GODZILLA but there are even more references to other films, including Ultraman, whose rethink also played Fantasia. The kaiju fan in me was delighted by most of what I saw.

The problem though is the film is all over the place. The comedy ranges from low brow to witty references. It never settles on a tone.  Additionally while I was watching this I kept wondering if this wouldn’t have been better had it been played straight, with it all a kind thriller to solve the problem before an unexpected disaster. It’s so all over the place that I completely understand the weak IMDB rating, it really doesn’t work on it’s own terms.(You really need to be a die hard kaiju fan for this to work for you)

On the other hand as a spoof of kaiju with all sorts of references it a delightful footnote for giant monster fans.

Official Competition (2022) Tribeca 2022

 

A billionaire desiring to leave something behind hires a quirky director (Penélope Cruz)to make a movie of a prestigious film. Along the way she hires a matinee idol (Antonio Banderas)and respected stage actor (Oscar Martinez) to play brothers. As the film plays out we watch the competition from the actors as they try to deal with the weird demands of their director.

Biting comedy skewers the film industry mercilessly as well as all artistic types and those wanting to buy a good name. This is a laugh out loud funny film that both enlightens and horrifies. Its a beautiful thing.

Why this wasn't a fall release when it could be fresh for multiple Oscar nominations is beyond me. Cruz is at the top of her game disappearing into her role and her hair in possibly her best performance. Banderas is equally great as a big star with a big ego. Its a role which reminds us just how damn good he is.

While I could wax poetic about everything in this film I have to mention the script. Its perfect. No turn is out of place. It messes with the audience making us think it will go one way only to go the perfect way instead. Every god damn turn is perfectly earned. This is scripting on a godlike level.

This film is a masterpiece and an absolute must see.

We Might As Well Be Dead (2022) Tribeca 2022

At an exclusive community may people would kill to get into the life of a security guard begins to slide. First her daughter locks herself in the bathroom and refuses to leave. The, as one resident’s dog goes missing  things and he breaks the rules about being drunken in public, the residents behavior begins to get strange.

Off kilter social satire is both amusing and kinda frightening as we watch as the residents become more cultish echoing the various communities both online and off that are forming all over the place. We clearly can see how the healthy mindset goes out the window for other thinking. I kept laughing and wondering why since it’s not that funny if you think about it since it all has dark overtones.

While I really liked this film a great deal I’m not going to pretend this film is for all audiences, satire is in the words of George S Kaufman, what closes on Saturday night. If you like satire or off kilter humor this is a must.

Liz Whittemore on Dual (2022) Sundance 2022

After receiving a terminal diagnosis, Sarah commissions a clone of herself to ease the loss for her friends and family. When she makes a miraculous recovery, her attempt to have her clone decommissioned fails, and leads to a court-mandated duel to the death.

The minute I realized the deadpan nature of most of the cast’s delivery, I exclaimed, “Oh shit, this has to be by Riley Stearns!” In 2019, I saw The Art Of Self-Defense, and the stylized nature of the dialogue has stuck with me ever since. Festivals can be a blur. I usually enjoy going into a screening blind. Either that or I can’t remember a damn thing by the time I’ve consumed 20+ films. Lucky for me, DUAL was my final watch. It was on my dance card immediately because of Gillan and Paul. I’m a big fan of Doctor Who and Westworld, and this plot sounded like a combo of the two worlds. I wasn’t necessarily wrong from a storyline and humor perspective.

There’s a blunt absurdity to it everything in this film. The indifferent nature of this emotionally complex scenario makes it cringe-worthy in the best way possible. There is no filter on anyone. Aaron Paul is Trent, Sarah’s Death Dual coach. He’s so zen and focused you cannot help but smirk every time he speaks. Could I watch him dance every day of the week? You’re damn right. Would I hire his character to teach me to disassociate violence and be a badass? Every time. Karen Gillan plays both original and clone Sarah. They are two distinct but equally fascinating characters. As original Sarah, her dispassionate personality is jarring. Once her training begins, Gillan’s past roles come in handy. As her clone, she gets to play Sarah with a bit more uppity finesse. Besides her tone, Gillan’s physicality made me laugh out loud. The 110% commitment by these actors makes DUAL so damn entertaining. Beyond the sci-fi aspect, it’s the emotional depth and darkness that hits me harder a day after watching. Riley Stearns, you wily bastard. You got me again.

To read more of Liz WHittemore's writing go to her regular home at Reel News Daily