Don’t Make Me Go (2022) ☆☆1/2(2.5/4): A road trip with her dad

Posted on July 18, 2022 by kaist455

“Don’t Make Me Go”, which was released on Amazon Prime in last week, is predictably sappy but fairly engaging before taking a sudden distracting left turn in the last act. While I will not go into details here for not spoiling anything, I can tell you instead that I was totally caught off guard by that during my viewing, and I am still not so sure about whether the movie really works on the whole, despite the commendable duo performance from its two lead performers.

John Cho, who has steadily advanced during last 18 years since his breakthrough turn in “Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle” (2004), plays Max Park, a single father who has raised his daughter Wally (Mia Isaac) alone for years since he divorced when she was very young. When he is not diligently working at some insurance company, Max usually pays much attention to his daughter’s daily life, and Wally cannot help but become annoyed with that just like any other adolescent girl around her age.

Anyway, the relationship between Max and Wally becomes strained due to a little transgressive act of hers and his following response, but then there comes a very bad news for Max. It turns out that his growing headache is actually caused by a tumor inside his head, and his doctor tells him that he needs to have a special brain surgery right now even though the surgery is quite risky. As ruminating over this sudden possibility of impending death, Max eventually decides to take a road trip along with his daughter, but he does not tell her anything about his serious medical condition while pretending that the trip is just for attending a reunion party for him and his college friends in New Orleans, Louisiana.

While she is not so enthusiastic about this road trip, Wally eventually agrees to go along with her father mainly because she is finally allowed to drive. As shown from a brief comic moment between them, she is not that fully ready for driving her father’s car, and that reminded me of how nervous I was when I drove a car on highway for the first time. Sure, driving on highway turned out to be much easier than expected, but I still remember well when I clumsily attempted to change lanes at one point, so I observed Wally’s heavy-handed attempt in the movie with some personal amusement.

After that point, the screenplay by Vera Herbert leisurely goes through one episodic moment to another along with its two main characters. While they do not have many things to talk about between them, Max is willing to show more of his life and himself to his dear daughter, and the mood between them becomes a little more cheerful as they gradually open themselves to each other more than before.

However, Wally also wants to have her own fun alone. When she and her father later stay at a motel in Texas, she comes to spend some evening time with a young motel employee, she becomes a bit confused when she subsequently finds herself attracted to this dude, who, fortunately for her, handles their situation as tactfully as possible.

When Wally and her father eventually arrive at New Orleans, she comes to learn a bit more about him via several old college friends of his, and Max is reminded of how things have changed since his good old college years. When he later meets a certain old friend who married his ex-wife shortly after she and Max had a divorce, he cannot help but feel bitter, and we are not so surprised by what occurs next between them.

In the meantime, the movie steadily maintains the suspense over what Max is still hiding from his daughter. Besides his current medical condition, he also wants Wally to meet her mother, but, of course, things do not go as well as he hoped, right from when he meets his ex-wife again with his daughter staying outside just in case. As a consequence, Max and Wally find themselves clashing with each other again, but then the movie throws them into a jarringly absurd comic circumstance which is the sole reason of its R rating.

Not long after this point, Herbert’s screenplay abruptly goes into a full melodramatic mode via the aforementioned plot turn, which will require from you considerable suspension of disbelief for good reasons. Although this does not disrupt the overall tone of the story that much, it feels so artificial and contrived that you may become less engaged in what has been so tenderly established and developed along the story.

Anyway, the movie is still supported well by the good efforts from Cho and his co-star. While Cho diligently holds the ground as required, newcomer Mia Isaac often shines in her likable performance, and she and Cho click well together whenever they share the screen. In case of several substantial supporting performers in the film, Kaya Scodelario is solid as Max’s longtime girlfriend although she is usually on the other end of the phone line, and Jen Van Epps and Jemaine Clement are also fine as two different figures in Max’s past.

Overall, “Don’t Make Me Go”, directed by Hannah Marks, does not succeed as much as intended, but it is not a waste of time at all due to the engaging moments from Cho and Isaac. I did not enjoy it enough for recommendation, but you may be able to overlook its flaws more than me, so I will let you decide whether you will spend some time with this modest character comedy drama film.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Persuasion (2022) ☆☆(2/4): A mediocre Jane Austen adaptation from Netflix

Posted on July 18, 2022 by kaist455

I sometimes wonder what Jane Austen would have written if she had not died not long after her last novel “Persuasion”, which is one of her moodier works in my humble opinion. While it is another story about courtship and marriage just like any other novel of hers, “Persuasion” feels considerably different from her two first novels “Pride and Prejudice” and “Sense and Sensibility” in terms of mood and storytelling, and it is also more matured and melancholic in comparison as focusing on the quiet romantic tension between two reserved adult characters who still long for each other despite their painful separation in the past.

And that is the main reason why I felt cold and distant to its latest movie adaptation, which was released on Netflix in last week. Besides handling its story and characters too lightly and too self-consciously, the movie often feels as if it were adapting “Pride and Prejudice” or “Sense and Sensibility” instead, and this undeniably misguided storytelling approach often clashes with Austen’s novel in addition to causing the considerable waste of the good efforts from its fairly solid main cast.

On the surface, the screenplay by Ronald Bass and Alice Victoria Winslow faithfully follows the storyline of Austen’s novel. In the opening scene, Anne Elliot (Dakota Johnson) tells us how she came to break up with a young navy solider named Frederick Wentworth (Cosmo Jarvis) several years ago, and she willingly informs us on how she has been unhappy and regretful during next several years. As approaching to 30, she is on the verge of becoming a spinster with no possibility of marriage in the future, and things get worse when her family is struck with serious financial difficulties mainly thanks to her flamboyantly vain and careless father Sir Walter Elliot (Richard E. Grant). After consulting with their accountant, the family come to see that they have no choice but to let their big manor rented by some prominent admiral willing to pay a lot for his temporal residence, and Sir Walter has to suck it up despite being quite humiliated to say the least.

Meanwhile, Wentworth’s naval career has been quite more successful than expected. As a matter of fact, he is now a very promising captain, and he happens to stay along with that admiral who rents the manor of Anne’s family. Although she is certainly interested in meeting Wentworth again, Anne eventually decides to leave before he arrives, and she does not hesitate to move to a house belonging to one of her two sisters, who already married and have two kids.

However, Anne soon comes across Wentworth not long after that just because the family of her brother-in-law happens to be quite close to Wentworth. When both of them are invited to a dinner at one point, the mood between them is pretty awkward to say the least, and the situation becomes a bit more complicated when it seems that Wentworth is very interested in accepting the active courtship from one of younger sisters of Anne’s brother-in-law.

Around this narrative point, the movie is supposed to draw more care and attention from us, but it only ends up stumbling a lot as clumsily trying to lightening up the mood. Dakota Johnson is a good actress with considerable talent and presence, so she manages to get away with often talking directly to us throughout the film, but, alas, many of her lines in the film feel rather frivolous instead of being filled with wits, humor, and eloquence as much as we can expect from your average Jane Austen movie adaptation.

To make matters worse, Johnson does not have enough romantic tension with her co-star on the screen. Although Cosmo Jarvis is no stranger to period drama as shown from his notable supporting turn in “Lady Macbeth” (2016), he unfortunately looks stiff and awkward at times, and you may wonder why the hell Anne is secretly pining for such a bland cold fish like his character. As some of you know, Jarvis can be pretty engaging as he was in “Calm with Horses” (2019), but the movie does not utilize him that much on the whole, and that is another disappointment in the film.

At least, there are a number of small enjoyable things at the fringe of the story thanks to several good supporting performers, who inevitably steal the show from Johnson and Jarvis while drawing our attention for their notable color-blind casting. While Nikki Amuka-Bird has several brief juicy moments as a no-nonsense friend of Anne and her family, Nia Towle brings some life and personality to her rather thankless role, and Richard E. Grant is a fun to watch as usual as Anne’s pompous father. In case of Henry Golding, a Malaysian-British actor who has been more notable since “Crazy Rich Asians” (2018), he surprisingly fits well with not only his opportunistic character but also the period background surrounding him, and he also has his own little fun when his character becomes quite frank about his hidden intentions.

In conclusion, “Persuasion”, which is directed by Carrie Cracknell, is not a total dud because of its minor saving graces provided by some of its main cast members, but it remains unimpressive and underwhelming compared to many of notable movie adaptations of Jane Austen novels ranging from “Sense and Sensibility” (1995) and “Clueless” (1995) to “Pride and Prejudice” (2005) and, yes, “Fire Island” (2022). To be frank with you, I already come to miss Roger Michell’s overlooked 1995 film version, and I sincerely recommend you to check it out instead as soon as possible.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Gunda (2020) ☆☆☆1/2(3.5/4): Animal life at farm

Posted on July 16, 2022 by kaist455

Documentary film “Gunda”, which is finally released in South Korean theaters in this week, gives us a seemingly plain but ultimately extraordinary look into animal life at farm. Mainly revolving around one particular sow and her piglets, the documentary has a number of visually stunning moments to engage and then impress you, and the overall result is simply mesmerizing to say the least.

During the opening scene, the documentary, which is incidentally shot in crisp black and white film, gradually intrigues us as the camera patiently stares at the opening of that sow’s residence from its static position. At first, the sow seems to be sleeping alone in her place, but then we come to notice some small movements inside her place, and then we eventually come to see a bunch of little piglets born from her. Like any other young animals, these piglets are usually driven by their constant hunger, and we soon come to observe them voraciously and mindlessly sucking their mother’s tits.

As watching how closely the camera stays around the sow and her piglets, I naturally wondered how the hell director Viktor Kossakovsky, who also serves as the co-editor/co-cinematographer of his documentary, and his crew members could generate such a considerable amount of verisimilitude on the screen. I am sure that they prepared and then shot a lot as steadily hovering around the sow and her piglets, but many of key moments in the documentary are done so smoothly and precisely on the whole that I became all the more curious about the skills and efforts put into these remarkable moments.

Anyway, Kossakovsky and his crew did a commendable job of immersing us into the daily life of their animal subjects without anthropomorphizing them at all. Although those piglets in the documentary may look a bit cute and fragile to us at first, they are far less amiable than that little pig in “Babe” (1995) as often following their basic animal instincts, and this unsavory aspect of theirs is quite apparent especially when they fiercely competing for their mother’s milk. In case of their mother, she may have some motherly instincts as expected, but she usually does not seem to care that much about her piglets, and you may wince for what she does to one of her piglets at one point early in the documentary.

During the two interludes where it pays some attention to some other animals in the farm, the documentary generates more curiosity and fascination for us. In the first interlude, the camera initially looks at a bunch of chickens getting out of their wooden container one by one, and we are amazed again as noticing how closely the camera watches these chickens without much distraction. Like the sow and her piglets, the chickens are somehow not aware of the camera that much, and we become more aware of the environment surrounding them as the camera stays as low as the feet of the chickens.

One particular rooster happens to draw more attention from us due to his rather shabby appearance, and, to our little amazement, it turns out to have a considerable physical disability which does not seem to bother him at all. During the one memorable scene where he has to cross over a little lug, all he has to do is trying a bit harder than other chickens, and that surely brings some amusement for us.

In case of the other interlude, the camera initially beholds a bunch of cattle coming out of a barn, and then it comes to focus more on two particular cows. Although they look merely plain without anything special to notice, we come to reflect more on the main purpose of their and other cows’ existence, but their minds are probably focusing on eating and living as usual, and I am now reminded of what W.G. Sebald once said: “Men and animals regard each other across a gulf of mutual incomprehension.”

When the documentary later goes back to the sow and the piglets, the piglets grow up a lot, though they are still eager to drink their mother’s milk as before. It is apparent that they become more inconvenient to their mother, and there is a brief amusing scene where she finally comes to have her own little private time as enjoying a bit of mud bath alone.

Although we do not see much of human presence throughout the documentary, the documentary never overlooks how the animals in the documentary are raised and controlled by whoever works in the farm, and this becomes all the more apparent during what can be regarded as the most dramatic moment in the documentary. Regardless of whatever is actually felt by her, the sow seems to be quite baffled and upset as trudging here and there for a long time, and the mood becomes quietly intense as the documentary simply observes her reactions and behaviors without losing any of its calm and objective attitude.

Overall, “Gunda” is a superlative documentary to be admired for its top-notch technical aspects as well as its thoughtful presentation of its unforgettable animal subjects. Without sentimentalizing or objectifying these animals at all, the documentary will leave considerable impression on you, and you may come to muse more on our relationship with livestock animals. Unless there is any groundbreaking industrial revolution, we will continue to depend on what they have provided us for many centuries, and they surely deserve some more respect and consideration, don’t they?

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Elvis (2022) ☆☆1/2(2.5/4): Extremely excessive and incredibly superficial

Posted on July 16, 2022 by kaist455

Baz Luhrmann’s latest film “Elvis” is extremely excessive and incredibly superficial. Like many of his previous works such as “Romeo + Juliet” (1996), “Moulin Rouge!” (2001), and “The Great Gatsby” (2013), the movie is full of Luhrmann’s own dizzy stylish touches throughout its 159-minute running time, and there are a number of truly electrifying musical moments to be appreciated, but the movie somehow ends up being curiously distant to its legendary real-life musician hero – even while throwing all the glitter and hoopla to be showered upon him on the screen.

In my humble opinion, the major miscalculation of the film comes from its attempt to tell the story from the viewpoint of a main character played by a glaringly miscast actor. We all know that Tom Hanks can play various real-life figures ranging from Walt Disney to Mister Rogers via his steadily engaging star persona, but I must say that he feels consistently strained as Colonel Tom Parker, who was mainly known as Elvis Presley’s manager. Besides that heavy makeup which is too distracting at times, his Southern accent in the film is as hammy as the one in the Coen brothers’ “The Ladykillers” (2004), and, above all, his natural star persona, which is as wholesome and decent as James Stewart’s, frequently clashes with his increasingly sleazy and opportunistic character.

In contrast, Luhrmann gets a right actor for playing Elvis. Besides ably embodying that familiar swagger and mannerism of Elvis, Austen Butler, a promising newcomer whom we will see again in Denis Villeneuve’s upcoming film “Dune: Part 2” (2023), galvanizes the screen whenever that is required, and he confidently holds the center whenever the movie dials up the level of fun and excitement to the level of 11 for Elvis’ music and dance. Although those loud and excessive musical scenes in the film often approach to the realm of those outrageously exaggerated concert scenes of Jim Abrahams, David Zucker, and Jerry Zucker’s “Top Secret!” (1984), Butler injects enough sincerity and passion to them, and his dedicated performance is certainly the best thing in the film.

Like Butler, the movie did try the best for entertaining us, but I am not so sure about whether it succeeds as much as intended. Right from the opening part, it alternatively dazzles us via showy camerawork and choppy editing, and it seems to be really ready to delve into Elvis’ life and career, but it only comes to scratch the surface as busily and hurriedly bouncing from one narrative point to another. Sure, we get all those important moments in his life and career, but the movie ultimately feels like the overlong and scattershot compilation album of his greatest hits, and the story unfortunately fails to give enough insight or depth to Elvis. For example, the movie frankly acknowledges the influence of a certain African American music genre on Elvis, but its depiction of this interesting aspect of his artistry is rather heavy-handed, and that is particularly evident when Elvis’ first performance is frantically intercut with what he experienced at an African American church revival during his childhood years.

During its relatively quieter moments, the movie tries to show more of the relationships between Elvis and several other main characters in the story besides Colonel Parker, but these main characters in the film do not have much personality beyond their sincere concern toward Elvis. While his father, played by Richard Roxburgh, is nothing but a pathetic and incompetent loser, his mother, played by Helen Thomson, is usually defined by her disapproving attitude coupled with alcoholism, and Elvis’ relationship with his future wife Priscilla (Olivia DeJonge) is perfunctory at best and tedious at worst (He was 24 and she was only 14 when they met for the first time during his military service period in Germany, by the way).

Ultimately, the movie tries to imbue more human complexity into the relationship between Elvis and Colonel Parker, but it does not seem to make up its mind about their problematic personal/business relationship. While their relationship swings back and forth between love and hate, we surely get lots of big dramatic moments including the one when Elvis makes a defiant stance against Colonel Parker via his latest song later in the story, but these moments somehow feel shallow without real emotional impact, and the same thing can be said about a part where Elvis is quite troubled and depressed by a couple of tragic historical incidents in the late 1960s.

As a result, the movie comes to trudge more during its last act, which depicts Elvis’ later years in Las Vegas. The movie still has a fair share of loud and shiny entertainment as Elvis tries to keep going on the stage despite many troubles including his serious drug addiction, but the overall result feels like a series of redundant encores before the fizzling ending where the curtain finally goes down upon our hero’s life and career.

Disappointed more with the film, I tried to appreciate more those several enjoyable things in the movie in addition to Butler’s commendable efforts. The production qualities of the film are top-notch to say the least, and I will not be surprised if Catherine Martin, who is incidentally Luhrmann’s wife, receive one or two Oscar nominations for her contribution to its costume and production design in the next year. In case of the soundtrack of the movie, it is surely full of various songs besides those famous songs performed by Elvis, and the score by Elliott Wheeler holds its own place well among those numerous songs in the film.

In conclusion, “Elvis” is another disappointment from Luhrmann after “The Great Gatsby”, but it has all the distinctive touches you can expect from him, and it will not bore you if you are willing to go along with its excessive style and mood. He and his cast and crew members surely try, but I could only observe their mighty efforts from the distance, and that is all.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Men (2022) ☆☆☆(3/4): Stalked by…. men

Posted on July 12, 2022 by kaist455

Alex Garland’s latest film “Men” is deliberately disorienting and baffling with the warped reality surrounding its heroine. While we can sense from the beginning that something is not so right, the movie keeps catching us off guard via a number of odd and disturbing moments, and you may find yourself scratching your head a bit on what is really happening to her.

The setting of the story is very simple to say the least. The heroine is a young woman named Harper Marlowe (Jessie Buckley), and, after an alarming flashback opening scene, we see her driving her car to some rural village where she is supposed to stay alone for a while. The holiday house for her, which is your average cozy British country house, is already prepared well, and she is greeted by a rather eccentric middle-aged dude who is incidentally the owner of this lovely house.

After looking around here and there inside the house along with the owner, she is eventually left alone in the house, and she really hopes that she will have some peace of mind after one tragically shocking incident involved with her husband. As shown from a series of flashback scenes, she already decided to stay away from him as soon as possible for understandable reasons, but she feels guilty about what subsequently happened, and the resulting trauma seems to be hovering over her mind no matter how much she tries to calm herself more.

Thanks to the tranquil bucolic environment surrounding her, she gets a bit relaxed at least. It often looks like there is no one around her in the surrounding area, so she can take a walk alone by herself without any interference, and we later get an interesting aural moment when she comes across a big tunnel in a nearby forest. As she makes sounds, the tunnel functions as a sort of echo chamber, and that reminds us more of her current solitary status.

However, it soon turns out that she is not alone at all. She spots a mysterious figure at the opposite side of the tunnel, and she quickly leaves the spot when this figure starts to approach to her. Not long after that, she spots a naked man staring at her from the distance, and she wonders whether this dude is the same guy she encountered at the tunnel.

Is this merely the reflection of her rather stressed mind? The movie does not provide any clear answer for that as toying with the possible unreliability of her viewpoint. When she shows the photograph of that naked man to her female friend during their video call conversation, it is clear that he was really there, and he becomes all the more real when he suddenly appears outside the house, but he remains as mysterious and frightening as before.

Meanwhile, we also come to notice a certain strange thing, which becomes more apparent as several male supporting characters appear along the story. I will not go into details here for not spoiling anything, but I can tell you instead that I admire how the movie pushes its relevant ideas on toxic masculinity as far as possible, and that somehow makes sense with its heroine’s ongoing psychological struggles.

In the end, the movie reaches to the climax sequence which is a naughty cross among “Repulsion” (1965), “Straw Dogs” (1971), and “The Shining” (1980), and that is where we become more uncertain about whatever is experienced by our heroine. While there are several certain incidents which did happen as far as we can see, there is not much sensible explanation on how the hell these incidents could happen, and even the other viewpoint besides our heroine’s in the story does not help much.

Nevertheless, the movie holds our attention till its gruesome finale via its increasingly disturbing atmosphere. Because this part comes to feel rather repetitive, I doubt whether it works as well as intended by Garland, but I still appreciate how daringly he attempts to emulate the body horror of David Cronenberg’s films.

Above all, almost everything in the film is held together well by the strong presence of Jessie Buckley, who recently received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for her supporting turn in “The Lost Daughter” (2021). Her character is more or less than a symbolic character to be disturbed and tormented, but Buckley ably fills the role with enough emotional details, and that is the main reason why the last shot of the movie works despite being a little too ambiguous in my trivial opinion. In case of the other main cast members of the film, Paapa Essiedu and Gayle Rankin did their best with their functional supporting roles, and Rory Kinnear surely has a fun with his challenging but interesting task.

In conclusion, “Men” is not as successful as Garland’s two previous works “Ex Machina” (2014) and “Annihilation” (2018), but it has a fair share of striking moments to remember at least. I am not so sure about whether they actually gel together well enough to generate something coherent, but the movie engaged me at least during its 100-minute running time, and I guess that is enough for recommendation with some caution. Yes, this may not be for everyone, but it is an interesting horror film with some mood and intelligence, and you may try it if you are looking for something different.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Girl in the Picture (2022) ☆☆☆(3/4): Who is she?

Posted on July 11, 2022 by kaist455

Netflix documentary film “Girl in the Picture”, which was released in last week, looks into one infamous criminal case which will unnerve you a lot as the documentary doles out those disturbing details of the case step by step. Although the overall narrative feels rather manipulate at times, the documentary keeps engaging us as steadily revolving around the true identity of a young woman at the center of the case, and it is poignant to see how she came to get a sort of closure in the end.

The documentary begins with the murder of a 20-year-old female stripper named Tonya Hughes in Oklahoma at one night of April 1990. When she was found at a remote roadside before her eventual death at a local hospital, it was assumed that she was just an unfortunate victim of hit-and-run, but it did not take much time for the local police to suspect her much older husband Clarence. When he attempted to remain as the sole legal guardian of their only son Michael even though it was revealed later that Michael was not his biological son at all, the local police came to pay more attention to him, and they accordingly came to suspect him more than before as noticing many suspicious aspects surrounding Tonya’s death. For example, her co-workers at a local strip club often witnessed signs of domestic abuse from her, and it was quite apparent to them that Michael was a hostage held by Clarence just in case.

And then the situation took a dark turn a few years after Michael was taken to foster parents appointed by the social service. After observing how Michael was often scared of Clarence, his foster parents became more cautious about dealing with Clarence, but then Clarence suddenly kidnapped Michael on one day. When the FBI quickly entered the picture, it subsequently turned out that Clarence Hughes was actually one of several aliases used by a criminal named Franklin Delano Floyd, who had a long history of serious crimes including rape. Furthermore, Tonya Hughes was not actually his dead wife’s real name, and both the FBI and the local police naturally came to wonder more about who the hell she really is.

While the search for Michael and Floyd was continued, the case was widely known all around the country, and that was when the case became all the more bizarre. It was discovered that Tonya and Floyd once lived in Georgia, and, believe or not, they presented themselves as a father and his adolescent daughter to their neighbors while using different names. Tonya was Sharon Marshall, and, as several high school friends of Sharon gladly reminisces about her in front of the camera, we come to gather how spirited and cheerful she was at that time on the surface.

However, Sharon’s friends also came to sense that intangible darkness behind her as she was about to graduate. She was smart enough to accepted by a local technology university, and she was really excited about getting the opportunity for her longtime aspiration, but, to the bafflement of everyone around her, she suddenly quit for no apparent reason. One of her best friends suspected that there was something bad between Sharon and her ‘father’ after Sharon showed her a rather inappropriate gift from him, but then Sharon and her ‘father’ subsequently left the town without any trace.

Through their continued investigation, the FBI discovered what happened next. Sharon was forced by Floyd to work at a local strip club in Florida, but then one of her co-workers came to learn a little too much about them as getting close to them. As a consequence, Tonya and Floyd eventually left their new residence, and that was how they later came to move to Oklahoma.

Anyway, thanks to the extensive efforts from the FBI and the local police, Floyd was eventually arrested and then brought to the following trial on several charges, but there were still a few considerable loose ends. While it was apparent that he killed Michael while running away from the police and the FBI, he did not confess anything about where he buried the body, and he also kept his mouth shut about Tonya’s true identity, though it goes without saying that he kidnapped her when she was very young.

These two unresolved matters haunted the minds of the investigators a lot for next several years, but then there came several significant breakthroughs not long after a nonfiction book on Tonya’s case was published and then received considerable public attention. It was revealed that Tonya actually had two kids and then had them adopted before having Michael, and one of these two kids approached to the author of that nonfiction book because she was really curious about who her biological mother was. In addition, Floyd eventually spoke more about his crimes, and that brought some light onto the case. I must point out that the documentary stumbles more than once when it delves into Tonya’s true identity during its last act, but it is really touching to see the following little personal ceremony held in front of her tombstone, which finally bears her real name at last.

On the whole, “Girl in the Picture”, which is directed by Skye Borgman, is as chilling and fascinating as you can expect from your average true crime documentary, Although it is inherently sensational just like another recent true crime Netflix documentary “American Murder: The Family Next Door” (2020), the documentary handles its sensitive materials with enough care and consideration at least, and you may come to reflect more on how her life was tragically cut short.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Sea Beast (2022) ☆☆☆(3/4): How to Befriend Your Sea Beast

Posted on July 11, 2022 by kaist455

Netflix animation film “The Sea Beast” sometimes takes its time as paying some attention to its rich details and backgrounds, and I like that. While it is rather familiar in terms of story and characters, the film entertains us via a number of solid visual moments besides several obligatory action sequences, and it is a bit shame that we can enjoy the film only via streaming service instead of watching it at big theater.

The story is set in a fantasy world where humans and those big sea monsters have clashed with each other for many centuries, and the opening scene succinctly establishes the story promise via its plucky little orphan heroine. Having read a lot of books about monster hunters, Maisie Brumble (voiced by Zaris-Angel Hator) have been quite eager to join the crew of one legendary monster-hunting ship someday, and we soon see her sneaking away from her orphanage and then leaving for a big port city which has been the center of the monster-hunting business.

That famous monster-hunting ship and its crew led by Captain Crow (voiced by Jared Harris) has just arrived there in time, but the captain is not so pleased although he and his crew hunted enough during their latest voyage. Many years ago, he lost one of his eyes due to one particular sea monster which has evaded him and many other monster hunters for quite a long time, and, just like that obsessive captain hero of Herman Melville’s great American novel “Moby Dick”, he has been quite determined to catch that beast someday. He actually had one golden opportunity during the latest voyage, but, alas, he had to give it up for doing the right thing as advised by his right-hand guy Jacob Holland (voiced by Karl Urban), who has been his surrogate son since he was rescued when he was just a young small boy.

Meanwhile, the king and the queen, who has lived at the center of the port city, come to consider using soldiers instead of hiring Captain Crow and many other monster hunters out there, so Captain Crow and his crew must prove their worth again. Boldly promising to the king and the queen that he and his crew will capture that elusive sea monster as soon as possible, the captain and his crew soon depart from the port city, and then, what do you know, they belatedly find that Maisie sneaked into their ship in advance.

When Captain Crow gladly allows Maisie to join the crew just because he sees from her what he once saw from young Holland, Holland, who incidentally came across Maisie before, is not so pleased, but then the situation becomes quite serious as they and everyone else on the ship later come across their main target again. As Captain Crow is ready to sacrifice everything for attaining his ultimate goal this time, the ship and its crew are thrown into a very serious peril, and that is when both Maisie and Holland come to make a decision against Captain Crow, who is naturally furious about what they boldly did for the ship and its crew.

And then Maisie and Holland are taken away from the spot by the beast. After spending some time inside the beast, they arrive at one remote island inhabited by the beast and many other sea beasts, and the mood becomes a bit leisurely as Maisie and Holland come to stay in the island during next several days. At one point, Maisie comes to befriend a little adorable creature, and she and Holland also come to learn that sea monsters can actually be much less aggressive than they look on the surface.

I wish the film could spend more time on presenting the ecological details of the island, but it still provides enough awe and wonder. While that little creature adopted by Maisie quickly wins our heart via its hyper-cuteness, we are also introduced to a few other beast characters in the island, and the film subsequently serves us a fun and exciting action sequence between the two clashing beast characters.

In addition, the screenplay by director/co-producer Chris Williams, who previously co-directed “Bolt” (2008) and “Big Hero 6” (2014), and Nell Benjamin also diligently builds up the drama among its main characters. While Holland and Maisie’s rocky relationship development functions as the center of the story, the film also brings extra personality to the beast, which comes to look as likable as that dragon character in “How to Train Your Drago” (2010). In case of Captain Crow’s ongoing quest for vengeance on the other side of the story, it is depicted with some human complexity, and his trusted crew members come to have serious doubt and reservation when he tries something rather questionable later in the story.

Everything in the story eventually culminates to the climactic part unfolded with lots of action, but the film thankfully does not lose its focus on story and character. In addition, it makes some good points on how to accept and recognize the past while moving forward to the future, and that will be surely appreciated by both young and adult audiences.

In conclusion, “The Sea Beast” did not surprise me much, but it did a bit better job than I expected from its trailer, and I also enjoyed the good voice performances from its main cast members including Karl Urban, Zaris-Angel Hator, Jared Harris, Dan Stevens, Kathy Burke, Jim Carter, and Marianne Jean-Baptiste. It could do more, but the result has at least more style and personality than, say, “Minions” (2016), and I am fine with that.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Cure (1997) ☆☆☆1/2(3.5/4): An old creepy psychological thriller by Kiyoshi Kurosawa

Posted on July 9, 2022 by kaist455

Kiyoshi Kurosawa’s 1997 film “Cure”, whose 4K restoration version is released in South Korean theaters in this week, is an unnervingly creepy and insidious masterwork to be appreciated for many good reasons. While you may be disappointed if you expect your average clean-cut thriller flick, it will deftly immerse you into its subtle but palpably ominous atmosphere once you go along with its rather twisty journey into darkness, and you will find yourself chilled a lot more expected around the very final shot of the movie.

At the beginning, the movie puts us right into a bizarre case of serial killings which has baffled a detective named Takabe (Kōji Yakusho) and his colleagues a lot. In each incident, a seemingly normal citizen suddenly committed a brutal act of killing in an uncannily identical pattern, but, while willingly confessing what she or he did, all of those murderers do not know or remember at all what actually motivated them.

While Takabe and a psychologist named Sakuma (Tsuyoshi Ujiki) keep searching for anything common among those murderers besides their identical killing pattern, the movie also shows us what is happening on the opposite side. We are introduced to a mysterious lad named Mamiya (Masato Hagiwara), and the movie calmly observes how this elusive young dude works upon his latest target. On the surface, Mamiya seems to be suffering some odd case of amnesia, and his latest target, a young married schoolteacher, willingly lets him stay at his residence, but Mamiya soon comes to shows his true color while talking a bit with his latest target. He simply asks a seemingly plain personal question, but, along with his increasingly insidious passive-aggressive attitude, that seems to strike something inside his latest target somehow, and that is subsequently followed by another atrocious incident to be added to Takabe’s case.

As alternating between Takabe’s ongoing investigation and Mamiya’s rather random wandering, the movie shocks and chills us via a series of striking moments which are all the more disturbing due to the uttermost detachment beneath them. At one point, cinematographer Tokushô Kikumura’s camera remains static while merely looking at what is about to be happen in front of a small police station sooner or later, and we come to brace for ourselves even though everything feels utterly mundane and detached on the screen. The following interrogation scene is also chillingly phlegmatic as the performers in the scene flatly deliver their lines, and then the mood becomes unexpectedly intense when Takabe attempts something risky on the interrogated person.

And then there comes a sort of breakthrough thanks to the latest incident of killing, but Takabe subsequently finds himself becoming much more agitated than before. There is something about Mamiya which frustrates and disturbs Takabe a lot, and that makes Takabe more obsessed with whatever Mamiya is planning behind his decidedly blank appearance. Regardless of whether he is really an amnesiac or not, Mamiya looks like enjoying toying with Takabe, and it looks quite possible to Takabe that Mamiya somehow found some diabolical method to manipulate others’ minds.

Never clarifying much what Mamiya exactly does to his targets, the movie instead focuses more on Takabe’s psychological implosion behind his stoic façade. Several early scenes in the film already showed us the growing estrangement between him and his wife who apparently has some serious mental problem, and the anxiety beneath their rather barren domestic life is often represented by the recurring sound of an empty washing machine. While she really needs more help than her routine visit to her psychiatrist, it is apparent that he also needs some rest and therapy, and we are not so surprised when he suddenly suffers a sort of mental breakdown later in the story.

As soberingly observing the accumulating crisis of its hero, the movie eventually comes to us as a social horror fable. It subtly implies that Mamiya’s certain frequent question functions as some kind of trigger for all that personal anger and discontent suppressed in the name of social conformity and normalcy, and it goes without saying that Takabe eventually comes to confront his own darkness like any other flawed heroes of noir thriller films.

While the finale is rather ambiguous with some unresolved story elements, the movie still holds our attention nonetheless, and then it strikes us quite hard via what is so casually presented in the last scene. I must confess that I am still scratching my head on how to process and interpret this scene, but I admire how effortlessly Kurosawa delivers the underlying dramatic impact. As looking at what is presented during the following end credits, I came to reflect more on what and how the movie is about, and the movie came to feel creepier to me than before.

In conclusion, “Cure” can be a sort of acquired tasted to you, but you may find yourself mesmerized by its distinctive creepiness and unconventional storytelling. Although some of Kurosawa’s later works such as “Tokyo Sonata” (2008) and “Wife of a Spy” (2020) are more accessible in comparison, the movie, which considerably influenced Oscar-winning South Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho (It is actually one of his all-time favorite films, by the way), still exudes its dark and insidious power even after 25 years, and I am glad that I finally watched it at a movie theater.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) ☆☆1/2(2.5/4): Man, Woman, and Metal

Posted on July 7, 2022 by kaist455

“Thor: Love and Thunder”, the latest offering from the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), does not surprise or impress me enough. While there are a number of inspired comic moments, the movie still feels like a passable mixed bag on the whole as trying a bit too many things together within 2 hours, and even the game efforts from its colorful main cast members cannot compensate for its weak aspects. 

After the prologue scene involved with the origin of its main villain, the movie shows and tells us about how things have been rather dissatisfying for Thor Odinson (Chris Hemsworth) since he joined the Guardians of the Galaxy after what happened in “Avengers: Endgame” (2019). While he is ready to function as the ace in the hole whenever the Guardians of the Galaxy need extra help, Thor feels rather bored and discontent, so, when there comes an imminent galactic threat toward all the gods in the universe, he instantly decides to take care of this matter along with his goofy rocky colleague Korg (voiced by director/co-writer Taika Waititi, who did a nice job of functioning as the main comic relief of the story). 

When Thor and Korg later arrive in a certain region in the Earth where Thor’s fellow Asgardians have resided since what happened in “Thor: Ragnarok” (2017), the main villain of the story, who is grimly and intensely played by Christian Bale, has already unleashed his terrifying power upon the Asgardians, and we accordingly get one of the main action sequences in the film as Thor fights against a bunch of big and hideous creatures along with many other Asgardians including Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson). Although this sequence is technically competent, my interest was quickly decreased as bored with those bland CGI creatures, and that was why I was delighted by Thor’s unexpected encounter with his ex-girlfriend Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), who looks quite different now as holding what once belonged to him.

We are not that surprised because the movie already showed us what happened to Jane after she broke up with Thor not long before “Thor: Ragnarok”. While she kept working during next several years without much regret, she suddenly found herself becoming a terminally ill patient, and then, after one coincidental moment, she decided to take a chance with that shattered hammer of Thor. As a result, she was transformed into “the Mighty Thor”, and she certainly impresses Thor and other Asgardians a lot as deftly wielding that hammer in the middle of their urgent battle.

When it belatedly turns out that the villain’s attack is a mere diversion for the next step of his diabolical plan, Thor, Jane, Gorg, and Valkyrie leave for a certain hidden place somewhere in the universe for getting some extra help from a powerful god ruling over the place, and the movie has some naughty fun as Thor and Jane try to sort out a rather complicated circumstance among them and their respective weapons. Although he is happy to see Jane again, he does not know how to process her considerable change, and his eyes also keep being drawn to his old hammer, while his current weapon seems to be not so pleased about that.

Anyway, the movie provides more fun and amusement when our four main characters eventually arrive at their destination. They soon come into a big meeting attended by many various gods, and then there comes Zeus (Russell Crowe), who is, of course, that certain powerful god who could help them via his awesome weapon. As already shown from the trailer, Crowe has a ball with playing his character as broadly as possible, and we surely get some good laughs from his deliberately hammy performance.

Compared to these and other entertaining comic moments in the first half of the film, the second half is relatively less entertaining as the mood eventually becomes as serious as required. The movie does not disappoint us during its eventual climactic part, and there are several good moments of poignancy including the one involved with Jane’s critical medical condition, but these moments somehow do not gel together well enough to generate enough narrative momentum for the story and characters. Above all, what is being at stake for our main characters does not feel that serious to us because we have seen how things have been often changed or reversed throughout numerous MCU flicks during last 14 years. 

At least, the main cast members of the film are entertaining to watch on the whole. Besides steadily carrying the film as required, Chris Hemsworth occasionally shows fine comic skills as he previous did in “Thor: Ragnarok”, and Natalie Portman is much more exciting compared to how she was regrettably wasted in “Thor” (2011) and the following 2013 sequel. Although she holds her place well around Hemsworth and Portman, but I wish the movie allowed Tessa Thompson to have more fun with her character, and the same thing can be said about Christian Bale, who still manages to balance his villain character well between a twisted sense of humor and an ample amount of pathos.

Despite its fair share of entertainment, I still think “Thor: Love and Thunder” could done better, so I put it below “Thor: Ragnarok”, which is still the most entertaining one in the bunch. Because I gave three stars to “Thor: Ragnarok” while giving two stars to the first two Thor movies, I give 2.5 stars to “Thor: Love and Thunder”, but I will not stop you from watching it if you have been less tired of that increasingly irksome homogeneity of many MCU flicks out there.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

RRR (2022) ☆☆☆(3/4): An energetic nationalistic buddy action flick from India

Posted on July 5, 2022 by kaist455

As your average seasoned moviegoer, I am not that easily impressed by whatever is shown on the screen, but Indian film “RRR” actually impressed me more than once with how wildly it tries many things during its 3-hour running time. Although I must confess that I often rolled my eyes at its unashamedly nationalistic stance coupled with overblown melodrama, I also appreciated the considerable technical efforts put into a number of big entertaining moments, and I gladly went along with its spirited mood despite some reservation.

Set in India during the 1920s, the movie revolves around two different heroes who are actually based on two real-life Indian revolutionaries, but, as far as I know, it is as historically accurate as “Inglourious Basterds” (2009) or “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” (2012). After all, you cannot possibly expect any historical accuracy from a movie which features lots of crazy and exaggerated actions including the one involved with a bunch of wild beasts bursting into the manor of the British Governor of India to terrorize his guests and soldiers.

Anyway, the movie begins with no less than three prologue parts for introducing its two heroes and a rather complicated situation surrounding them. After showing how one young little girl of a certain rural tribe is taken away from her family just because of her singing ability, the movie introduces us to an Indian British military officer named Alluri Sitarama Raju (Ram Charan), and we see how much he is determined to distinguish himself enough to impress those British superiors of his. Just for catching one guy as ordered, he willingly charges into angry local protestors surrounding his military post, and, after injuring so many unfortunate protestors in the process, he eventually catches and then takes the guy into the post.

Nevertheless, promotion still seems to be out of reach for Raju, and then there comes another good opportunity for him. After notified that someone from that rural tribe came into Delhi for looking for that kidnapped girl, the governor demands that that figure should be arrested as soon as possible, and Raju immediately comes forward once it is promised that whoever captures that figure will be promoted.

Meanwhile, the movie also shows what is going on the opposite side. While quietly staying at the home of a Muslim family living in Delhi, Komaram Bheem (N.T. Rama Rao Jr.), who is incidentally that figure in question, is already working on the plan for rescuing that kidnapped girl, and he also does some daily reconnaissance on the manor of the governor, which is certainly guarded heavily every day.

And then, of course, Bheem comes across Raju by sheer coincidence. When a little young boy is suddenly thrown into a serious danger under one big bridge, both Raju and Bheem hurriedly come to the rescue, and, though they are total strangers to each other, they somehow click together well enough to save the boy together without any physical injury despite their daredevil action under the bridge. What follows next is a long musical montage sequence, and that is probably enough for you to sense how quickly their accidental friendship is solidified during next several days.

Of course, both Raju and Bheem still hide their respective missions from each other, while having no idea on what they are respectively doing behind their back. The mood occasionally becomes tense as Raju keeps pursuing his target with Bheem heading toward the final stage of his plan, but the movie does not lose its sense of fun and humor at all, and we get a decidedly anachronistic moment of song and dance when they happen to be invited to a dance party via a young British lady Bheem comes to befriend. I will not go into details here for not spoiling any of your fun and entertainment, but I can tell you instead that I mused on how wrong I was to think I have seen it all.

During its last hour, the movie eventually becomes more serious as expected with several narrative turns, and we are surely served with a series of blatant melodramatic scenes to touch and galvanize its local audiences. The part involved with Raju’s hometown sweetheart feels rather obligatory, and what happens between her and Bheem later in the story is pretty contrived to say the least, but you will probably forgive that and several other shortcomings of director/writer S.S. Rajamouli’s screenplay, which is based on the story by V. Vijayendra Prasad, when the movie goes wilder during its climax action sequence. While Ram Charan and N. T. Rama Rao Jr. are effective with their intense physical presence, Ray Stevenson is also solid as the main villain of the story, and he and Alison Doody, who plays his equally cruel wife, surely demonstrate to us that there is no meanness like British meanness.

Overall, “RRR”, which is the acronym of “Rise, Roar, Revolt”, is basically your typical nationalistic propaganda flick, and you may be bothered by how often Muslim characters are marginalized in the film as it wields its Hindu cultural background right on our face, but it handles its story and characters with enough skill. Although it does not reach to the sheer outrageous fun of Rajamouli’s two previous films “Baahubali: The Beginning” (2015) and “Baahubali 2: The Conclusion” (2017), the movie is still fairly entertaining, so I will not grumble for now. After all, how can I be grouchy after that joyous musical ending where everyone is apparently enjoying themselves a lot?

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | 2 Comments