Search This Blog

Monday, December 30, 2019

Best Movies of the Decade




2010
The Social Network
Inception
Black Swan
Exit Through the Gift Shop

2011
Bridesmaids
Take Shelter
Midnight in Paris

2012
Silver Linings Playbook
Django Unchained
Skyfall

2013
Inside Llewyn Davis
The Act of Killing
Gravity

2014
Birdman
Guardians of the Galaxy
The Grand Budapest Hotel
American Sniper

2015
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Results
Inside Out

2016
The Lobster
Hacksaw Ridge
Toni Erdmann

2017
The Florida Project
Lady Bird
Thor: Ragnarok

2018
Sorry to Bother You
Avengers: Infinity War
The Death of Stalin

2019
Parasite
The Farewell

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2/5 Stars)


In my review of Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi, I stated that the quality of Episode VIII would rely on how Episode IX resolved the interesting questions that were raised. I found especially intriguing the idea that Rey would not be related to any of the other main characters, this usually being a prerequisite for importance in a Star Wars movie. The idea posited was that the Force is self-balancing. In this way, a being that was either very light or very dark would naturally bring about their opposite at some other place in the universe. With this understanding, Luke Skywalker felt it prudent to leave behind the force altogether in order to not further provoke more Sith Lords.

It turns out none of this matters or even happened, which kind of renders both Episode VIII and Episode IX pointless, which in turn renders Episode VII pointless too. To watch this new trilogy is to watch the most expensive interplay between bad improvisors in the history of movies. At the very least, as things were being made up as they went along, the contributors could have abided by the first and only important rule of improvisation, “Yes And…” That is if you are to not have a plan, the very least you can do is not undercut your fellow collaborators. This basic concept is lost on the director of the Episode VII and Episode IX J.J. Abrams and the director of VIII, Rian Johnson.

For certain movies, a warning against spoilers is warranted. “Parasite” is a good example. Its plot twists are nonobvious and are brought about with Hitchcockian suspense that is quite pleasurable to experience in the moment. For other movies, warnings against spoilers behaves more like a marketing tool. By begging reviewers to not allow spoilers, the mega corporations involved keep away from the audience certain unimaginative details that would be complete let-downs if revealed.

For instance, Rey is not a total nobody as presented in Episode VIII. Actually, she is the granddaughter of Emperor Palpatine from “Return of the Jedi”. What a let-down. That sound is the most interesting development in Episode VIII hitting the bottom of the dust-bin. What is more disappointing is the reason why Rey is a Palpatine. It seems entirely do with the decision to hew as closely to the structure and development of the plot of “Return of the Jedi” as possible. Looking back, I don’t see why I expected anything less. After all, Director J.J. Abrams did the same thing with Episode VII, making that movie’s plot an almost retread of Episode IV: A New Hope and Director Rian Johnson did the same thing with Episode VIII, making that movie’s plot structure a retread of Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.

It should be noted that Director J.J. Abrams is once more complicit in the murder of billions of people. With an amazing lack of originality, a weapon that destroys planets has been developed by the bad guys. Mr. Abrams once more shows no hesitation at all in using this weapon, incinerating a planet as an afterthought and not particularly caring about treating the aftermath with the sort of respect that should be called for amongst such an extraordinary loss of life. The movie, like all Disney movies, is PG-13, because there is not a hint of sex involved anywhere. Even Poe, played by Oscar Isaac, the Han Solo-ish character, is not getting lucky anytime soon. A sad development given that he is instrumental in saving the galaxy by the end of the movie.

There are certain things about this movie that do not come remotely close to making sense. However, it is hard to talk about them in a critical manner because the movie moves so fast from plot point to plot point that it hardly matters what has just happened. “Look Something Shiny and New,” is the name of the game here. When the original Star Wars trilogy came out, the critics wailed about its reliance on special effects and lack of character development. What glory days those were, when characters engaged each other in half a minute-long conversations and military tactics, however limited, were considered. In Episode IV, the main characters land a ship in the Death Star and by subterfuge, loosely defined, rescued the princess. Here, the main characters land a ship in an enemy star destroyer and the first thing they do is come out guns blazing as if three people with blasters could take down a gigantic ship by brute force. The original trilogy at least gave the audience certain outs for unlikely scenarios. To experience this trilogy without rolling your eyes you must be a total idiot.

The ending bespeaks a recent trend in the ever-escalating stupidity of movie villains. Like the army of the undead in “Game of Thrones”, the evil forces here are both impossibly powerful and also can be take down with the capture of a single target. I would posit that fair fights that are resolved by strategy are more interesting that lopsided battles won by technicalities. But this idea is lost on the makers of Star Wars.

There is a bright spot in this movie and that is the basically good acting of Adam Driver as Kylo Ren and Daisy Ridley as Rey. This is helped by a storyline that gives these characters things to do and emotions to develop. The same cannot be said for the characters of Poe, played by Oscar Isaac, or Finn, played by John Boyega. They do not do anything in this movie but run around from plot point to plot point. From the promise of Episode VII, it is rather disappointing that Poe and Finn do not ultimately have interesting story arcs. However, at least these characters had the promise of an interesting story arc. There are several characters in this trilogy who were introduced and then promptly forgotten. Rosie, a seemingly important character in Episode VIII hardly shows up in Episode IX (Maybe the focus groups found that the world was not ready for a Black-Asian romance). Benicio Del Toro from Episode VIII does not appear at all in IX. Domnhall Gleeson has a fate that suggests he wasn’t willing to work for more than a week. Keri Russell literally phones it in, perhaps only showing up to work for one day to dub the lines for her bemasked minor character. Several other characters are introduced in this episode seemingly for the limited purpose of introducing new series on Disney+. But is there actually a plan to make these series or are these scenes just bait for the focus groups where the real decisions would be made? If that series starring Lando Calrissian does not come to fruition, Episode IX will harbor an utterly pointless scene in a few years’ time.

There is a way to plan out a franchise and that way was ably demonstrated by Marvel over the past decade. Not every movie in the Marvel franchise is a must-see-most-important-installment-of-the-franchise movie. Most movies focus on a single character which in coordination with other smaller movies build into the bigger spectacle movies every four or five years. Star Wars has not done this. The sad thing is that it probably could have. What really helped Marvel was its library of over fifty years of comic book storylines that the movies could pick and choose plots from. Star Wars has a library substantially similar to this: four decades of books written by professional fans and blessed as canon by George Lucas. None of this material was considered for Episodes VII, VIII, or IX. Why?

Corporate cynicism comes to mind. The new trilogy is the same thing as the old, but with better special effects and a more diverse cast. Why take a risk making something new, when you can repackage the old as a presentation to international audiences unfamiliar with the old movies. The global marketplace is where the real movie is made. My appetite for Star Wars has officially been sated. I do not plan on seeing any further of these movies in theaters. 

The Lighthouse (4/5 Stars)




“The Lighthouse” is firmly rooted in that David Lynch territory where realism and continuity are sacrificed to effect and mood. What we are seeing on the screen is not so much what the characters are experiencing but what they feel they are experiencing. And what they are feeling looks to be the sailor’s version of cabin fever. There are two men, an experienced lighthouse operator played by Willem Dafoe and his new apprentice played by Robert Pattinson. What happened to the last apprentice that worked here asks Pattinson. He ended his own life, explains Dafoe, after going mad.

“The Lighthouse” was directed by Robert Eggers, written in cooperation with his brother Max Eggers. Writer/Director teams of brothers (Coens, Wachowskis, Nolans) have led to some of the more confidently weird movies in existence. This team of brothers can be added to that shortlist. The Eggers are relatively new. They have only one other mainstream movie (The Witch) which I have just added to my Netflix queue.

There is much to the “The Lighthouse” that makes it a unique experience. To start, the movie is shot in black and white and has a narrow aspect ratio. The time of the story looks like the late 1800s or early 1900s. There is only one location, a lighthouse on a deserted rock. The original score blares ominously, and much delusions of mermaids and pigeons. Then there is the ACTING, which involves much yelling in Irish/Scottish/pirate brogue. The dialect is given special mention in the credits because it is not of this time and seemingly not of this world. Willem Dafoe, not a particularly handsome man, and Robert Pattinson, who I insist does not look normal, successfully inhabit this alien land. They spend much of the time drinking moonshine and colorfully cursing each other.

There is some character background and plot but it doesn’t much get in the way of the weirdness. To summarize, Robert Pattinson is new to the lighthouse, drawn to the job because the wages are higher for work on desolate rocks in the middle of nowhere. Willem Dafoe appears to have been there forever. He is a hard taskmaster, but when a storm grounds all work (preventing the new man from leaving at the end of his tour), and there is nothing to do all day but get piss drunk and dance, the professionalism of the lighthouse suffers quite a bit.

This is one of the those movies I would love to hear a director’s commentary for (not that these things are done much these days) because I can only imagine how crazy it was to be on the set with Willem Dafoe cursing up a piratical storm. I bet there are a lot more good stories there.


Monday, December 23, 2019

Parasite (5/5 Stars)





Once upon a time there were two families, one rich and one poor. The rich lived at the top of the hill. At the bottom lived the poor. “Parasite” is the latest effort from writer/director Bong Joon Ho (“The Host”, “Okja”). Its scope is specific, it concerns itself with two families in Seoul, South Korea, one rich and one poor and takes place almost entirely within two homes. Its effect is broad. I expect families all over the world regardless of location or language would immediately understand the themes. Like most great cinema, “Parasite” finds in the details a larger universal truth. No wonder this Korean film won the Palme D’or a Cannes and has grossed over $100 million outside South Korea. I think this movie has the better chance at a Best Picture Oscar than any other foreign language film I have ever seen.

The poor family’s name is Kim. The patriarch is played by Kang-ho Song, the only actor I recognized. The parents are unemployed and the family earns the rent for his basement apartment by taking on gig jobs like folding pizza boxes. One day, the son is presented with an opportunity to be recommended as a English language tutor for daughter of the Park family, the rich family at the top of the hill. The son asks the school friend that wants to recommend him for the job: “Why pick a loser like me?” The school friend explains that he has a crush on the rich daughter and does not want to recommend a tutor that the daughter would ever consider. The poor son takes no offense. He know he is poor.

Deceit is required to be hired. Educational degrees are forged. The rich mother (played here by Yea-Jeong Jo) is particularly gullible and says things that make the poor son believe she could be further deceived. Step by step the Kims insert themselves into employment in the Park household. The poor daughter becomes the art therapist for the rich son. The poor father becomes the chauffeur of the rich father. The poor mother becomes the full-time maid. The Parks are not exactly being taken advantage. The Kims are totally competent and do their jobs well. The people that suffer are the other employees the Kims succeed in defaming and having terminated. The Parks are more unaware than anything. The Kims are

Now we are at the midpoint of the movie. The Parks leave town for a camping trip. In the night, the old housekeeper comes back claiming she has forgotten something in the basement. At this point, the movie twists in a weird, suspenseful, and supremely satisfying way that all marketing have deftly avoided spoiling. I too would not dream of saying anymore about the plot and from here on out will only wax philosophical.

In one scene, the Kims are discussing the Parks. The poor son says, “They are rich, but nice.” The mother disagrees: “The are nice because they are rich. If I were rich, I would be soooo nice.”

And why wouldn’t the Parks be nice people? They are secure and comfortable and are treated nicely by everyone they meet. One would be tempted to conclude that it is the poor Kims that are treating the rich Parks poorly. But then an unexpected tragedy occurs, and the rich Parks, in particular the naïve rich mother, perform an act so extraordinarily insensitive that it approaches cruelty, except of course, that the Parks have no idea that they are acting cruelly because the Kims have been so thoroughly dishonest. Mayhem follows and the movie resolves itself in such an unexpected symmetry that the story elevates itself into the realm of timeless parable.

What is the responsibility of the Parks to know what is going on around them? How much fault do the Kims have for their part in sheltering the Parks. I was reminded by the chapter in Ralph Ellison’s “Invisible Man” where the protagonist, a black student at a black college in the south, accidentally chauffeurs a white trustee of the college to the wrong side of town. The white trustee is appalled by the poverty, seemingly seeing it for the first time. Back at the college, the black college president expels the student for showing the white trustee the poor conditions of the community. As the black college president explains, his power over the protagonist comes from his efforts to make the whites feel good about themselves and he does this by keeping from them societal truths. That is not so different from the story of the Kims and Parks. The rich live in bliss on the clouds. Down below the starving poor eat each other.