10 for the first story line and 5 for the others.
THE LAST SCENE IS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THING IVE EVER SEEN. I LOVE MAC SO FUCKING MUCH
[8.8/10] There’s a funny thing about these updated, transmogrified Shakespeare adaptations like 10 Things I Hate About You. If you didn’t know better, you could call the plots convoluted. There is a complicated web of relationships and deceptions, to the point that you practically need a diagram to explain it properly.
In short, Michael helps his friend Cameron woo Bianca by convincing Joey to pay Patrick to date Kat, because Bianca, per her father Mr. Stratford, cannot date until Kat does. With me? Well then, it turns out that Kat dated Joey, and after Bianca picks Cameron over Joey, Joey picks Bianca’s friend Chastity, while Michael pursues Kat’s friend Mandella, as Kat and Patrick’s tempestuous relationship takes root.
It’s a little dizzying, and yet the complex string of friends and enemies and relationships that tow the line between put-ons and genuine affection track nigh-perfectly into the high school setting. Despite the dense qualities of that big ball of string’s worth of plot threads, the complicated social structures and intersecting circles of high school make for the perfect way to realizes The Bard’s comedies in the modern day.
But 10 things is more than just a transmogrified version of The Taming of the Shrew. It also a charming tale that captures the heart and hazards of adolescence at the same time it exaggerates them for comic effect. What’s most impressive about the film is how it has its cake and eats it too on that front. There are goofy beats and subplots that only happen in teen movies, like unexpected party scenes and famous bands showing up to play contemporary (hopefully) chart-topping hits for the soundtrack.
But amid that broader material, there is a real examination of what it is to play up or down to expectation, a theme present in the work that inspired 10 Things, but which is given new life in the guise of the teenagers who are at that point in the fraught process of growing up where they’re deciding who and what they want to be, in love and in life. The gross wager that turns into real love is a hoary trope (see also: fellow 1990s borrower She’s All That) but by rooting the romance at the core of the film in two people who embrace a thorny image and find the hidden depths behind the prickers in one another, the film does justice to its source material and resonates with a target audience trying to figure out which parts of who they are malleable, which parts are non-negotiable, and which parts are fit to be broadcast to the rest of the world (or at least, the relevant social circles)>
It is also just damn charming. The film is full of quotable lines and crackerjack exchanges between characters. The cutting aside is wielded well and often, and side characters like teachers (including the great Allison Janney) and parents (Larry Miller, who nails both comedy and emotion as Mr. Stratford) provide a backdrop of colorful characters for the main story to flourish in. The writing stands out in 10 Things not just for the amusing lines which liven some otherwise familiar teen material, but for the way it allows the film to, in true Shakespeare form, shift tones into more serious material when it needs to.
The same goes for the characters. Kat shoots off the best zingers in the movie, and with her rebellious attitude and literary bent, it would be easy to turn her into a one-dimensional avatar rather than a character. Instead, the film roots her perspective and demeanor in an experience with Joey that gives form to her concerns of Bianca following in her footsteps, and gives just enough context to her mom leaving to make the crisis of conscience and turning point understandable.
By the same token, Bianca could easily be a generic popular girl, and in fairness, at certain points of the film, she is. But she too has a simple but meaningful arc of playing to expectations only to realize that she doesn’t necessarily like what that gets her, and it allows the two sisters to grow in their understanding of one another in strong scenes that deepen their relationship.
The objects of their affection receive a bit of shading as well. The reveal that Patrick, who puts on a gruff exterior and bears the reputation derived from many humorous urban legends about him, is not as wild as he seems is, perhaps, a predictable one. But he gains strength from the way that he and Kat see bits of themselves in one another, Cameron is a bit flatter, learning a trite if endearingly-put lesson about not accepting the notion that he doesn’t deserve what he wants, but there’s enough there to give ballast to the enjoyable-if-disposable teen romp elements.
Even Mr. Stratford, who is arguably the most outsized major character in the film, gets a bit of shading. While he spits out awkward-sounding nineties slang and is comically overprotective and paranoid of his daughters getting pregnant, the film balances that with a subtext to his insecurities about Kat leaving for Sarah Lawrence. There is a Daria-like quality to the film’s ability to poke fun at the parent-child relationship, but also find the sweetness and sincerity in it.
That’s what makes 10 Things more than the sum of its byzantine bets and love triangles. Some twists are convenient, some gestures a little too big to work anywhere but on the silver screen, and some bits of forgiveness come a little too easy. Still, the film keeps its plot, humor, and drama working in sync, where one scene can make you chuckle, the next will let you get to know a character a little better, and the one after will tug at your heartstrings, just a little bit.
The oh-so-nineties soundtrack immediately places in the film at a specific moment in time, but it speaks to the relatable qualities of that quest to figure out both who you are, and who’ll accept you for who you are, that feel like life and death for all seventeen-year-olds. 10 Things is a touchstone for those who grew up with it, both for the quips and clever asides that let the film crackle, and for the notion of young men and women, cutting through pretension and presentation, and finding something true beneath it, in themselves and in the people they love.
This show was way better than it had any right to be. It was supposed to be just a funny crime show wth dick jokes. But it's just so much more. It has great acting, smart writing, intersting characters and explores some very interesting ideas. Satire done right.
The rating should at least be in the 90s for sure! Very inspiring movie for me personally. If you have an idea you are trying to get off the ground, watch this movie, then you will start working on it immediately after. Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross do an amazing job with the soundtrack. Interesting note that approximately 83% of trakt has been coded while listening to this soundtrack :)
just want to make something clear: she does NOT look like katy perry AT ALL
"Well, nobody's perfect" but this movie is.
What the fork? My favourite 25(ish) minute show of last season is back on? And it kickstarts things with a double episode? Holy shirtballs! I'm glad the double episode showed that everything is still spot on, from the humour to the acting. The Crocs reference, the "I'm going to the gym" guy, Tahani wearing cargo pants... This season is already showering us with tiny hilarious details!
A couple of things bothered me, though. The third reboot rendered the season one finale pointless, there will be no note to act as a clue for Eleanor, anymore. And we now know everyone else is evil and plotting against the main characters, so it kind of diminishes the enjoyment a little, at least for me. But, anyway, I'm really curious to see how will Eleanor and the gang figure things out in the third reboot.
I'm so glad to have this show around, again!
We've been sent good weather today.
My favorite part? David Duchovny as a woman. ♡
While the film is an incredible and affectionately made tribute to the boys, there is a fair amount of artistic licence used and the film’s story differs from real life events.
“Zenobia” - The Elephant Film....
In “Stan and Ollie”, the film portrays Stan at Fox Studios ready to sign a contract but Ollie doesn’t turn up because he’s still at Hal Roach Studios, making “the elephant film” ( the actual title was “Zenobia”).
In reality, after leaving Roach Studios in 1940, both Laurel and Hardy made 6 films with Fox Studios and 2 films for MGM between 1941 - 1945. (Therefore Ollie did actually turn up to sign the contracts.)
“Zenobia” was made in 1938, when Stan’s contract with Roach had terminated and he was unwilling to sign a new contract with Roach until Ollie’s had expired too. Therefore they could sign a contract at the same time together. It was the next best thing to having a joint contract.
While the “Stan and Ollie” film portrays them both as remaining bitter about “the elephant film” and eventually having an argument in public about it, the reality was that it was never an issue between them. By all accounts, they always remained friends and never had a falling out.
“Stan and Ollie” doesn’t mention the fact that Ollie appeared in two further films without Stan. “The Fighting Kentuckian” (1949) starring John Wayne and “Riding High” (1950) starring Bing Crosby.
If “the elephant film” was such a big issue between them, it’s doubtful Ollie would have appeared in two more films without Stan.
Nobby Cook.....
In the biopic, when Ollie falls ill, tour manager Bernard Delfont convinces Stan to temporarily join a new comedy partner named Nobby Cook. Due to his loyalty towards Ollie, Stan backs out at last minute, causing them to cancel the show.
Nobby Cook was actually a fictional character created for the “Stan and Ollie” film. There was never any attempt to form a new partnership. In reality, Ollie suffered a mild heart attack in Plymouth in May 1954. He recovered at the Grand Hotel and they both sailed back to the United States on 2 June. Ollie sadly passed away in 1957.
The UK Tours....
Laurel and Hardy toured the UK in 1947, 1952 and 1953-54. They had also arrived in the UK for a holiday back in 1932, however the huge crowds of people that greeted them prevented any relaxation they might have hoped for.
The “Stan and Ollie” film portrayed it as though they’d lost their popularity and that they were initially playing to almost empty theatres. In reality their first tours were highly successful. The crowds that greeted them at each public event can only be compared to Beatlemania.
It was only on their final tour in 1953-54 that audience numbers occasionally dropped but certainly not to the same extent portrayed in the film. Contemporary reviews of this tour were also mixed, most likely due to Ollie’s failing health.
On all of their tours they were part of a package variety show with a number of different acts on the bill.
Hal Roach Studios - The Lot Of Fun.....
Laurel and Hardy’s film producer, Hal Roach was nothing like how he was portrayed in the biopic. All of his actors and crew were extremely well paid.
In 1934, Roach paid himself $2,000 a week, Ollie also received $2,000 a week and Stan was on $3,500 a week. Therefore Roach was paying Stan Laurel more money than he was even paying himself. This was reflective of the many extra hours Stan spent working with the writers before and during the production and then working with editor Bert Jordan after photography was completed.
If certain scenes didn’t play too well in the previews, Roach never objected to spending more time and money to make it a better comedy film.
According to Laurel and Hardy film historian, Randy Skretvedt: “Roach actually lost money by making the three and four-reel films because the agreement was for a set number of two-reelers.”
On making the four-reel Laurel and Hardy film “Beau Hunks” Roach told Skretvedt: “It was already sold as a two-reeler; we couldn’t get any more dough out of all the circuits because they’d already bought it. But it was just one of those things; it was intended to be a two-reel comedy, but it kept getting funnier.”
Roach kept Laurel and Hardy on separate contracts that expired six months apart. This was to encourage them to stay at his studio. While some would say that this was a manipulative arrangement, it is understandable that Hal Roach wanted to keep the biggest comedy stars of the day at his studio. Especially considering the fact that his first major star, Harold Lloyd left his studio in 1923 to produce his own films.
In the Laurel and Hardy Encyclopedia, Glenn Mitchell writes: “Though necessarily ruthless, Roach permitted his employees a mostly free hand with an agreeable environment; most agree that there was no finer boss.”
“There’s been no other studio to date like it. MGM, Fox, Universal - they were nothing but machines. The Roach lot was very individual. And the people there had talent with a wonderful sense of humor. The Roach studio was nicknamed ‘The Lot of Fun’ because it was a comedy studio - and it was a lot of fun”. - Roy Seawright, optical effects department. Quote from “Laurel and Hardy, The Magic Behind The Movies”, Skretvedt.
"Much of the time, you feel like you're beholding the real duo, so thoroughly conceived are the actors' physicality and performances”. - Todd McCarthy, The Hollywood Reporter.
While “Stan and Ollie” is a fictional re-imagining of the events and creative with the facts, it is certainly an excellent tribute to their work and legacy. Many skeptics have been astonished by the skilled performances of Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly and most agree that they couldn’t have chosen anyone better to play the parts.
The costumes and set designs for the film are nothing short of phenomenal. During the re-creation of the famous dance sequence (from their 1937 feature “Way Out West”), they were able to use exactly the same background footage used in the original film. It’s this attention to detail which makes the viewer believe they’re watching the original sequences.
Most importantly, the film has helped put Laurel and Hardy back in the limelight and encouraged parents to show their children the greatest comedy films of all time. Their timeless humour appeals to all ages and this film has helped introduce them to a new generation.
It is a very funny and moving film made with genuine affection for the comedy of Laurel and Hardy.
The thing I like most about Ridleys movies is the fact that he uses CGI only when absolutely necassary and does as much practical shooting as possible. And he always tells a story. Just watched the extended cut which gives it a little more depth.
I can`t remember a bad movie from him but Gladiator sure is one of Ridleys masterpieces.
[8.4/10] My first (semi) live IASIP premiere! Huzzah!
Like everyone, I wondered how the show was going to deal with Dennis’ absence, but I probably should have expected what we got, a delightfully meta riff on what the absence of an essential character means, replete with boatloads of raunch and comedic takes on co-dependence and remaining static.
Maybe that’s a little high-falutin for a show as juvenile as IASIP, but I don’t think so. Especially as this show has gotten older, it’s gotten more ambitious, and dare I say deeper, even as it slings episodes where people play a sex doll like a tuba.
I think my favorite thing in the episode is how it explores the ways in which The Gang is fixated and dependent on Dennis as an ingredient in their group, while being blind to the ways in which he holds them all back. It’s striking how better situated and successful everyone seems to be with Dennis gone and with Cindy (Mindy Kalig, ably taking part in the show’s particular banter) calling the shots. The plans are better formulated, there’s more positivity, and everyone seems do be doing well overall.
Everyone except Mac, that is. I appreciated the tack where Mac, most of all, is still fixated on Dennis, and without his sexuality to repress, he’s now just repressing his crush on Dennis, replete with a lifelike and disturbing sex doll. The meta humor of Charlie and Dee assuring Cindy that no one knows why Mac does what he does (probably just a cry for help or attention) and to ignore it and move on was well done in that vein.
But Mac gets The Gang stuck on the “Dennis-shaped hole” in their lives in the same way that Mac does. The bell tolling as the camera zooms in on the unnerving face of the Dennis-esque sex doll is a great running gag, and I like how the episode uses it. Dee is feeling self-confident, Mac is proud of his body, and Frank and Charlie are competently executing (and appreciating) the plan for once, only for them to hear Dennis’s negging and have it still bring them down.
It’s a frickin’ neurosis, and the show uses it both for humor and for its dark character explorations. The way everyone instantly regresses, and falls back into old habits is well done. I even like how they tie things in with The Waitress, using the whole “absence” thing to tie into Charlie never wanting to talk to her and then tying that into her hearing the Dennis doll too, showing that he’s burrowed into everyone’s brains. Community’s pulled the same trick (and with a similar, albeit more network-friendly version of the same archetype), but it still works in IASIP’s more sophomoric setting.
And I like how the show turns that into a miniature referendum on whether the show itself will evolve (which it has, despite maintaining much of the same style and humor) or whether it will remain the same, reuse the same ryhthms, and so on. It’s not the first time the show’s tackled this sort of thing, but it does it well here, with Cindy representing change and something new, and a surprise return from Dennis himself representing the comforting but sclerotic business as usual.
Of course, this is The Gang, so they go with the easy and familiar. Dennis returns, the status quo is maintained, and with it, the rest of the group are doomed to confidence-shattering insults and failure once more. There’s something implicit in that -- the show kind of admitting that it’s not inclined to evolve or get better in a self-aware but kind of cynical way -- but then again, maybe they know that those familiar rhythms are part of what we love about the show, even if tired bird jokes start to grow thin for both writer and audience. Either way, it’s good to have IASIP back.
Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan is a complex slow burn I found to be utterly engaging. Natalie Portman gives her most commited and powerful performance as Nina, the Swan Queen.
Matthew Libatique's cinematography draws you to Nina with his hand held and tight close ups and shows both the majesty of the stage and the loneliness in the quest for perfection with his wide masters.
Nina's erratic descent and final recognition reminded me of something I was once told; once you know you are mad, it's really quite liberating.
Totally ballerina!
I've been waiting for this show with a lot of excitement. The Netflix shows are probably my favorite part of the MCU. DD and JJ were simply excellent, with compelling stories, great cast and a dark tone, although each of the two had its own unique atmosphere. DD played out like a crime procedural/legal drama with phenomenal fight scenes, while JJ was a gritty psychological thriller with incredible depth mixed with some neo-noir detective stuff. And I loved them both. Luke Cage was more of a mixed bag for me, but the first half of it was great and it had some of the best music I've heard on any show in a long while, so I still liked it. And Iron Fist... I mean, I didn't hate it? It was just kind of meh. But still, seeing these four characters together was something I've been looking forward to for months.
This episode is your typical introducing-our-heroes-and-setting-up-the-overarching-plot pilot. Except we already know the heroes, so instead, we catch up on what they've been doing. Matt's given up on the vigilante business and his relationship with Karen is visibly strained, he's also having trouble moving on from Elektra. Jessica drinks hard as ever and doesn't want to be anyone's hero, thank you very much (although she can't help but follow the mystery that quite literally knocks on her door), Luke has a delightful reunion with Claire (I love them!) and is determined to continue his mission of fighting crime in Harlem, and Danny... spends most of the episode on a plane. Doing nothing. Oh well. There's a reason Iron Fist was the weakest show of the four.
We're also introduced to our main villain. Sigourney Weaver is one of those people who just radiate elegance and steal any scene with their presence. That's the kind of person I strive to be. She's so... regal, I guess. They couldn't have chosen a better actress.
We see Foggy (who is rocking the hell out of his new haircut) for a second as well and Elektra, The Actual Love Of My Life, makes a short appearance at the end. I forgot how beautiful she is. Elodie can kick my ass anytime.
I love how they used colors in this episode. Matt's apartment was bathed in red, Jessica's scenes were sort of pale blue with hints of purple, Luke was surrounded by different shades of yellow, and Alexandra's signature hue seems to be white, from the sterile hospital rooms to her coat to the pidgeons in the park. I also love the way the show fluidly moves from one character to the next with some really neat editing. The older I get, the more I find myself paying attention to those more technical aspects of shows and movies - cinematography, editing, sound design. The opening episode of The Defenders is incredibly aesthetically pleasing and it seems a lot of thought went into the visuals, which I appreciate.
This show has some of the worst plot development I have ever witnessed. One second they are getting ready to pack up, the next second a couple zombies pour out, oh no, wait no big deal they have guns. But wait! theres more! 500 zombies then appear out of thin air, almost like they all have slippers on and weren't making a single sound, I wonder which zombie was leading the takeover as it was clearly coordinated. It is like whoever is writing this has forgotten EVERYTHING that made the original walking dead great. Realistic character development, toying with the concept of murder and survival. This show throws that all out the window in favor of "crazy intense fight scenes" and "nothing but action".
I really hope this show wraps up soon so I dont have to sit through more seasons of this garbage
Slow. Built to a finale but a terrible ending. Bacon suddenly stopped being a cop for no reason and allowed Penn's character who is at least a murder suspect to walk away drinking whiskey. This is moments after some forced sentimental talk about the past to try and neaten up the story. Again. The ending was that the bad guys win ending. The bad guys being local bully mobster Penn with his two annoying cock sucker friends. Obviously true to life in that evil prevails but it didn't work for me in this movie by its own logic failures. Was it true to Penn's character, a man so proud with truth and paying for his crimes, how he never even confessed? Again, Bacon stopped caring about being a cop about the man he was just protecting?. Why didn't Robbin's just tell the truth instead being an obvious suspect? Instead of confessing he asks for a Sprite. That'll make you seem innocent yeah. Why could a boy that didn't talk secretly talk or was hinted to being able to? How did the cops just happen to show up in time? Was Penn's wife so sick that she really called him a king for being a murderer? Yes. Did Robbin's wife more or less get Robbins killed by presuming he murdered her to Penn thus leaving her child fatherless? Yes. Did Penn just kill a guy based on his own forced confession with no asking for evidence and then he's actually suprised when he got the wrong guy? Yes. And what was Kevin Bacon's wife's about, especially when we had over two hours to explain her? But it's OK... because Bacon makes a gun sign at the end to Penn and that has to mean something.
It's like the ending was a different movie which also revealed split personalities and a terrible movie.
What about the portrayal of Dave by Robbins. Acted well but a cliché abuse victim or what?
Talk about a movie with bad morals and holes
Tremendous episode, one of series' best. But it has me a bit terrified of what is in store for the final stretch of the season. The three Jennings seem to be in their own downward spirals (Elizabeth's is increasingly horrifying, Philip's hard-to-watch, Paige's forboding) and growing apart while they're at it.
An interesting gothic horror film which is more atmospheric in the first two acts but veers sharply (and successfully) into gore at the end.
Apostle is well written, if a little slow at the beginning, but Dan Steven's uneven performance (he over-does it quite a bit at the end) is distracting.
There's also an argument to be made that a subplot is 'the environment'. That man is trying to harness nature and feed her poison to feed their own greed, yet by doing so they're destroying themselves and their community.
In short, Apostle is nature horror that grows on you.
Remember when you watched 2012, San Andreas, Geostorm, The Day After Tomorrow and you wished there had been more action? Well, Hurricane Heist is the first disaster film where you'll wish there was less because what they have here is so cringe-worthy it feels like watching your parents have sex: yes, it's action but my lord, no one should have to witness something that awful.
The CGI is from the 1970s, before it existed, with rain that looks hand-drawn and special effects made with a Snapchat filter. There is enough WTF in this film to sink a small island and the only thing more predictable than the story is how much you're gong to hate this film should you see it.
Hurricane Heist is nothing more than a storm in a teacup. Watch Twister again, instead.
Fuck that ending. I'd give the movie an 8.5 up until literally the last two seconds of the movie. After that it's a high 6.5 or low 7/10.
Seven Samurai can only be described as magical piece of art.
Don't let the 210 minute tag on the movie scare you. It is worth the ride and experience.
Each samurai has a distinguished trait which makes them memorable and allows the audience to form a bond with them
The cinematography is simply outstanding especially when it comes to the scenes that include rain.
An easy to comprehend plot with thrilling action scenes is also what adds to the appeal of Seven Samurai.
Depicts the Japanese culture and relation between Samurai and Farmers in the 1600s.
Memorable movie quotes:
* This is the nature of war: By protecting others, you save yourselves. If you only think of yourself, you'll only destroy yourself.
* Danger always strikes when everything seems fine.
I will tell the truth: if I had not known that the story of the two main characters is taken (partly) by the story of Pawlikowski's parents (in fact the movie is dedicated to them), I would have been slightly disappointed. But knowing that, everything appears to me in a different light. It is clear from the outset that the director does a little construction of the characters: it is as if he knew them too well and had no interest in forcing descriptions and dialogues and in highlighting their personalities. This leads the viewer to witness a story of unconvincing love: platonic, but often fleeting; strong, but fragile. But there's simply no time to become attached to the two. And one can also see this in the film's duration of only 80 minutes. Passion is not an easy feeling to cultivate, and distance is a double-edged sword.
The strength of this movie is the tenderness of this love story: mystical, silky, ordered even if impossible. To lose oneself, to find oneself again, to lose oneself again and find oneself again: it's the circle of love.
The black and white technique contributes to weave the plot. One thing however needs to be noticed more than the B&W: the editing is just stunning. There are some black frames just perfectly included between two sequences, also with the sounds, giving the impression that the earliest sequence is not over yet, but it is. The moments of silence of this movie are among the best you can find in contemporary cinema.
Stalinist Poland is a background that adds mystery and difficulty, but comes out in the end in all its cruelty when the male protagonist (a pianist) is sentenced to fifteen years of forced labor that forever destroy his hands, forcing him to not play ever again (music is a strong part of the movie: Wiktor is a pianist and a composer, Zula is a wonderful singer and dancer, and they met the first time during an artistic audition).
In the end, their love is crowned, but in the only possible way: fleeing from the world and rising. The last seconds show a field crossed by the wind, a force of nature, nature that constantly fights against entropy, like the two characters.
7/10
World Premiere Review:
It's a decent feel good movie, but has some rough edges. Casting Emily Blunt was spot on and Lin-Manuel is wonderful and some of the musical numbers are fantastic. Unfortunately the beginning and middle drag, with Meryl Streep's bit being not great and completely unnecessary. It was also disappointing that none of the original songs made it into this sequel. Dick Van Dyke steals the show at the end, and yes, he does all his own dance moves at 92 years old. Also seeing Angela Lansbury still with it at 93 put a smile on my face. Mary Poppin's exit is surprisingly cold and seems like a missed opportunity to tug at some heart strings. They should have cut the chase scene in the middle (that also felt completely shoehorned in) to make room for it.
its moo motherfucker, its moo!
[9.0/10] There are some losses that you can’t come back from, that change you so fundamentally that even the most vital pulls and connections cannot bring you out of it. That is the core idea at the center of Manchester by the Sea. It is a film about grief, how we deal with it, and how its tendrils wrap themselves around the rest of our lives, to where some can wriggle free and some cannot.
The emblem of that is Lee Chandler (Casey Affleck) a Boston handyman who is the film’s protagonist. When Lee’s brother Joe (Kyle Chandler) dies, he is called back to Manchester to settle his affairs, including what’s to be done about Lee’s nephew Patty. These events call on Lee to face the site and memories of his own traumas, as he’s trying to do right by his brother and help his nephew with his own grief.
What’s striking is the way that even before the exact contours of the loss that made Lee into the person he is today are revealed, it’s clear that he is a broken man, someone who is not fully present in the world. Some of this comes from the flashbacks pepper into the film, which show a much more jovial and engaged individual, cutting a contrast with the dead-eyed janitor who lurches through life in the present day. But a great deal of it comes from an outstanding performance from Affleck, who evinces a detached hauntedness from the first minute of the film.
When it is revealed, at the halfway mark, that Lee’s three young children died in a fire, a fire that he accidentally caused, its crystalizes the reasons for Lee’s demeanor and his difficulties in returning to Manchester and acceding to Joe’s wishes that he become Patty’s guardians. But to the film’s credit, it never underlines these points too heavily, to where they’re barely uttered or even acknowledged out loud, but permeate the background of every scene and every moment.
It’s never says that Lee so resists the notion of living in Manchester because it’s the place where his children died. It just shows him looking out onto the city and intersperses that with scenes of the grisly aftermath. It never says he’s reluctant to be a father because he blames himself for what happened to his kids, it just shows him struggling to give any meaningful direction to Patty. It never says that he’s overly cautious when it comes to safety, particularly the safety of children, it just shows him overreacting to a misunderstanding when Patty tries to get out of the car while he’s driving. It never says that Lee won’t grant himself the chance for human connection again because he doesn’t believe he deserves it and because he’s scared of where it might lead, it just shows him having ample opportunities to connect with people and invariably turning them down.
Much of this is conveyed in Affleck’s bravura performance. He portrays Lee as completely hollowed out by the horrors he’s been a part of, so convincingly deadened by them that he’s no longer fully alive, just this inert, barely there thing that continues to exist without any reason to. The little details of the performance win the day. There is his sublimated anger, at himself and at the world, that prompt him to get into bar fights to feel something. There are the moments where a real human being breaks through so that Lee can comfort his nephew. There are hints, in a heart-rending scene with his ex-wife (Michelle Williams, who makes a big impact in limited screen time) at the recriminations, self-inflicted and otherwise, that leave such overwhelming guilt lingering within him.
But the best thing to recommend the film is its ending. In so many movies in this same vein, the natural move would be for Lee to have his troubles with being back in Manchester and faced with the ghosts of his past, but that the importance of Patty’s upbringing and his brother’s wishes would be enough for him to overcome them. Instead, in a quietly emotional moment, Lee confesses to Patty that he “just can’t beat it.” The memories of his children’s deaths, of his inadvertent hand in them, are too much for him to bear, even for this, one of the few people, if not the only person, that Lee still loves.
There is boldness in that choice. It’s too much to call Manchester by the Sea subversive, but the heart of storytelling, particularly in quiet character dramas like this one, is change. It’s the old story circle again – a character is called to adventure, has an experience, and comes back changed. Manchester uses that structure, but subverts it. It shows Lee on the cusp of recovering, on the cusp of making a breakthrough, coming ever so close to having that change and epiphany and recommitment to a new life, and then faltering in the face of inescapable reminders of what he was running from in the first place.
It is, in that way, one of the truest testaments to grief imaginable. There are some things in life that cannot be outrun or overcome. It is not a heartening notion, but it is true to live, and Manchester by the Sea examines it with conviction, empathy, and grace.
It would be easy for Lee to be the bad guy, for Patty to be a brat or the piteous kid who lost his father, for the community of Manchester to come together to raise them both up. Instead, there is complexity in the film’s DNA, to where Lee is equal parts unreachable and understandable, Patty experiences genuine pain and difficulty but also reads as a genuine teenager with all the rough edges that come with, and the people of Manchester help the Chandlers as best they can, but help them with well-warranted reservations as well. And it posits that recovery, even when necessary to take care of others you love, may simply not be possible.
And yet, for all that the film has been decried or championed for its depressing qualities, it ends on a note of measured and earned hope. Lee is not ready to be a father again, to be back in the place where his children died again, even for Patty. But he is ready to open his life again, just a little bit. His new apartment will have an extra room so that his nephew can come visit and stay. We see him out on that boat, on the water once more, symbolizing the times when he could be happy and his old self, and it’s a sign that he is not better, but that for the first time in a long time, there’s room in his life for something better.
Lee may never recover from this, may never become the person he was or even a person who a stranger could stand to have a conversation with for a half an hour. But he is, it seems, ready to become more, to open himself up to the last person in this world that he cares about. Manchester by the Sea ends on a note of hope. That hope is measured, balanced out by the cloud of grief that Lee will likely never fully escape, but it is a sign that even amid the harshest of losses, the ones that take away everything, there are people who give us something to hang onto, something to live for, something that makes us just a little bit more who we were before.
Wildlife is a methanol fire: it burns slower and you can't see the flames but it does the same sort of damage as a regular blaze.
Because Wildlife burns like a fuse that's building slowly to a soft explosion, all of the elements must be primed to prevent the spark from going out. The actors, the script, the directing must all be optimum to keep the fragile pyre burning. Fortunately, that's the case with Wildlife.
Young Ed Oxenbould (who I remember best from Shyamalan's The Visit) continues to show promise as an up and coming actor, Jake Gyllenhaal makes all the right choices in keeping his portrayal subtle and strong, and Carey Mulligan turns in what may be her best performance to date.
Paul Dano passes behind the camera for the first time and delivers a film full of subtle poetry that many with far more experience will envy, bringing to life a nicely paced story penned by himself and partner (in every sense of the word) Zoe Kazan.
So why not a perfect 10? The film fills its art-house, family drama niche perfectly, but doesn't try to go beyond that. It's content to be just a small film and not a small film with universal aspirations (like Jim Jarmusch's Paterson). There are, as well, some story lines that are threaded then neglected (the friend Ruth, for example) and finally, I felt some of the changes the characters went through were too hurried.
But those are small drops in the ocean of Wildlife, and do little to dilute or douse its power.
Spielberg's most personal film and probably his best. This has stood the test of time and remains a classic film. There are not as many of Spielberg's directorial flourishes here but the decision to shoot from the POV of the children is inspired and certain shots stay with you - the silhouette of the bike passing by the moon of course is now iconic. John Williams at this stage of his career was rolling out classic scores one after the other and here he creates a piece of music so good, Spielberg decided to edit the final sequence to the music. But it's the children and their performances that make or break this film and while the core trio are all very good, Henry Thomas delivers probably the greatest performance by a child actor to date, completely sells the relationship between Elliott and ET, and provides the emotional backbone to the film that makes it so appealing.
Here's an interesting article with more background on the varying runtimes throughout this season, including the 30 minutes of 1x06. Some spoilers on the 2nd page, so avoid those if you haven't watched it all the way yet.
http://www.slashfilm.com/tv-show-running-times-the-oa/
