KaZenPhi Reviews

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

a misfire from the getgo

[5/10 · 13 June 2022]

The anticipation in the years leading up to the 2015 release of the Force Awakens was something else. The original cast was to return, John Williams would do the score, new welcome additions to the cast like Max von Sydow and Oscar Isaac, JJ Abrams to direct, whose previous Star Trek films may have been bad Star Trek films but amazingly entertaining Space Adventure films in the vein of the original Star Wars. A return back to the roots after the mixed reception of the Prequel trilogy who many felt eschewed emotional connections in favor of too clean-looking Special Effects.

The lead up to Episode "7" reminded me of the late 90s when the Special Editions and the glut of quality Star Wars games and books had everyone hyped for Episode 1. And similarly the hype wasn't deserved.

The passage of time hasn't been kind to this movie. While my original reaction at the time after seeing it in theaters was lukewarm at best, its flaws have become even more apparent after the conclusion of the rather haphazardly put-together sequel trilogy. Namely the complete lack of originality or vision, uneven tone, unmemorable score, etc. Despite the humongous budget and incessant marketing Lucasfilm and Disney delivered only a decent, thoroughly mediocre movie that probably would have crashed and be forgotten now, were it not for the once precious Star Wars branding.

To be fair the first act of the film is fun and probably the only part worth watching still (save for parts of the climax). Expertly paced and acted. All the new characters are introduced, the new heroes are likeable, the new villains are briefly scary.

Yet as soon as I noticed I was just watching a remake of the original Star Wars I mentally and emotionally checked out of the film. There are entertaining bits here and there and Harrison Ford looked like he gave a crap about acting for a change, but the rest of the film is just going through the motions without much excitement, tension or fun. I realize there are always recurring elements in Star Wars, but literally resetting the universe after 30 years to the exact same dynamics as the original films was a huge mistake. As was made apparent by the sequels they had written themselves into a corner right then and there and my excitement for the new films went right out of the window. In book form the Thrawn trilogy and various other media have shown what you can do with the Star Wars cosmos post-Return of the Jedi, what Disney chose to do instead were soft reboots of Episode 4,5 and 6 with some of the elements rearranged so it wouldn't be as obvious.

I love the old movies too, they inspired me in many ways as a person and an artist, and all the stuff in them, lightsabers, x-wings, the millenium falcon, chewbacca, the music and so on are the definition of classic movie magic, but their stories are already told. If I want to revisit them I can just put in the bluray any time. Why assemble the best craftsmen in the industry and the gdp of a small country to tell the same story again only without the spark that made it so magical?

Of course I get it from a monetary perspective, this was basically a feelgood nostalgia-bait scam that paid off big time - I'm asking more poetically like a human who has an emotional investment in movies when they're good.

Clearly the new films have found an audience, more power to them, we eventually got some quality tv out of the Disney takeover, and I'm still amused how many weirdos on the internet got really mad when more women and non-white actors appeared in the cast, but people I don't like getting angry about something is not enough to get me invested in a property. I also suspect people's fervor with elements of the new movies has more to do with what they hoped to find in them rather with what was actually in them. I'd love to see queer characters in Star Wars too for example, or more people of color, but people need to realize Disney will only commit to representation if it doesn't endanger their bottom line in certain more conservative countries. So to those of you who think Star Wars has gone "woke" (regardless if you believe this to be a good or bad thing) you're total chumps.

The Force Awakens isn't terrible, as a setup to a new trilogy it is serviceable, but in hindsight it already put the new films on the wrong track and there was no recovering from that. With more time and care this minor stumble right ouf of the gate might have been fixed, but instead they kept churning out new Star Wars movies on a yearly basis, until even the most die-hard fans were sick of it and the general audience was just glad it was over. 7 years later I'm still flabbergasted you would undertake such a huge project without planning everything ahead of time.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022)

Another one

[4/10 · 22 February 2022]

This was alright, completely serviceable middle of the road streaming fodder which immediately robs it of any reason to exist or an identity.

They'll probably make more now. I'm not angry or enthused either way, this series has long run its course. I went in realistically without expectations, all I ask for at this point is entertainment, but the overall lack of focus and creativity make this one much worse than it could and should have been.

The original is a classic still, one of the few horror movies that truly transcends its genre. Like its peers, the proto slashers of Black Christmas and Communion it just oozes 1970s cynicism and is filled with deeply nihilistic blunt violence that gets under your skin. Even without gore it is truly unsettling and strangely artistic in its misanthropy, similar to a Francis Bacon or Otto Dix painting.

Only the Marcus Nispel remake managed to come close to this atmosphere. It's slicker, more stylish and very graphic but it packs a similar punch and once it starts going it doesn't let up and just pommels you. None of the various sequels come anywhere close, this new one included. Instead of a disturbing nightmare filled with subtext its yet another generic slasher wearing the skin of a classic, somewhat ironically. A shallow exercise, never suspenseful or tense at any moment it copies visuals and plot points from the horror genre without understanding their purpose.

But a few positives first, this wasn't a horrible ordeal for better or worse. The actors are doing fine and the brief gore scenes are fun if lacking in impact and creativity. The run time is quite short too, yet even at roughly 80 minutes it barely held my interest all the way through. Dumped on Netflix has long become the new Direct to Video at this point. While there will always be quality shows and movies on streaming services breaking the mold, the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre is merely next in a long line of lacklustre entertainment, that passes the time but ultimately leaves you with nothing.

The movie business still hasn't fully begun to recover from the pandemic and I can't blame Netflix for not having the biggest confidence in the franchise to put up a sizeable budget beforehand, but there's no reason the movie had to look this cheap and small. A lack of budget can be an asset if a clever filmmaker is behind the wheel, yet a lack of focus as portrayed here is the kiss of death. I will cut a flawed film a lot of slack if it feels like someone with passion was behind it, but safe for the two lead actresses it feels like everyone else was just going through the motions. If you have to keep making these turkeys, and I know you do because it's a recognizeable title, why not give it to an experienced indie director with a voice? Have Ari Aster make a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie. He's made a successful career out of bringing aesthetically pleasing, grotesque horror that makes you want to puke to a large audience, he'd be a perfect fit.

While I was watching TCM 2022, it did feel like a minor if noticeable step up from the other recent sequels, prequels, remakes etc, but writing this review a mere 10 minutes after I've watched it I'm not so positive it won't prove just as forgettable as the myriad of its siblings.

While the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series isn't quite as wrecked, confused and botched as the Halloween franchise it stands to reason it should have never been a series in the first place. The Tobe Hooper original belongs in a film museum, most of the sequels belong on bargain bin 10 movie dvd packs.

Special Actors (2019)

Fun little movie with a few lengths

[6/10 · 29 January 2022]

This is the new feature by director Shinichiro Ueda who burst on the scene recently with One Cut of the Dead, one my favorite movies of the last decade. A cleverly put together funny and heartwarming story that keeps throwing surprises at you until everything is tied up with a beautiful knot at the end.

Special Actors likewise sports this trademark irreverent humour and the unique style that made One Cut of the Dead so amazing. There are a story similarities to movies like the Game, but the way the plot (both the literal plot and the one in the movie) unfolds is decidedly more clever and layered. I think a lot of the subtle references to marketing culture and the so-called new religious movements, and thus much of the humour of the film, will be lost on viewers not familiar with an admittedly not very mainstream aspect of Japanese culture.

There are also a few lengths here and there. I think a good 10 minutes or so could have been trimmed. Whenever the film is moving at a brisk speed it's a great ride, and very funny to boot. The plot conclusion likewise is hilarious, touching and satisfying, but until then the pacing is a bit uneven and we thus don't quite get the next masterpiece by Ueda this very well could have been.

It's worth checking out though when you can catch it at a festival or once it hits home video.

Swordfish (2001)

Ouch...

[2/10 · 23 January 2022]

This is one of those movies where I kept thinking "whatever I rated this back then, it couldn't possibly have been low enough"

It stars John Travolta fresh off his Battlefield Earth success, sporting a fine beer belly, the worst soul patch of the noughties (which is saying a lot) and the hair cut of every annoying techbro you ever met in school who constantly bragged about his IQ and his graphics card specs. Also starring are X-men cohorts Hugh Jackman (playing the bad boy from your favorite boy band) and Halle Berry (playing Halle Berry). They are supposed to have the hots for each other I suppose, but I think both had more chemistry with the toady guy with the long tongue in X-Men than they have here.

The story is a quagmire of meaningless tech lingo, cheap suits, silly shades, intrusive attempts at coolness and bad action. Everything is digitally color-corrected because it looked cool in the Matrix. There are club scenes with electronica, because it looked cool in the Matrix. The protagonists are stylishly dressed computer geniuses/hard boiled detective like characters because it was cool in the Matrix. It's one of the most transparent uncreative attempts to copy the formula I've seen.

What people didn't seem to get is that Matrix was a genuinely great movie, inventive and smartly constructed, and not just a cool flick where people wore long coats and black sunglasses. Funnily enough the longer this film goes the more it looks and feels like a Hackers knockoff, rather than a Matrix knockoff, which is probably not what they were going for. If only it was as entertaining as Hackers though.

The hacking is predictably hokey and cheesy of course, you know the drill: montages of someone typing really fast in a command prompt that is completely meaningless and ugly, set to big beat or house music. However the comedic value is very limited and the scenes tend to get interrupted by some of the most unremarkable action set pieces you've ever slept through. Elements from the schlockfest Mission Impossible 2 keep inexplicably creeping in (minus Cruise's splendid haircut), because noone involved had any idea what they were doing and you have a lot of time to start wondering what you're even doing with your life and that inventing movies might have been a mistake in the first place.

After meandering thusly for quite a while Swordfish eventually goes back to aping Matrix visuals again, but at this point I was so bored not even the silly glasses and attires did elicit a tiny chuckle.

I'll give Swordfish one teensy bit of credit though: the opening scene of Travolta's allegedly badass deeply pretentious monologue, that was supposed to be an intense truth-bomb moment, was grade-A comedic gold. After that it is all downhill as far as the entertainment value goes. They should have let him go ham on the hamminess. Imagine the Travolta from face/off or Broken Arrow in this one and you immediately get a better film.

Apart from being a bad knockoff this is seriously one of the worst action movies of its time and it aged about as gracefully as an open yogurt you forgot in your old fridge. It falls flat on every level. Whereas Equilibrium got unfairly lambasted I think critics and audiences alike should have been much more cruel with Swordfish. I'm assuming the relatively respectable imdb score is due to noone having watched this in the last 20 years and rating it on hazy memories of it being ok.

Guns Akimbo (2019)

I guess someone has seen Kick-Ass...

[4/10 · 23 January 2022]

I think everyone including Daniel Radcliffe assumed this was going to be way better. This is the kind of movie that happens when you only have enough ideas for the poster and the trailer.

I sincerely wanted to like it and looked forward to it, because I've immensely enjoyed Radcliffe in all his indie weirdo roles and Jason Lei Howden's previous film Deathgasm was an absolute delight. Visually the image of a guy with guns screwed to his hands walking around in a pyjama, boxers and giant plushy monster feet is funny, I'll give it that, but it's not remotely enough to carry a movie on its own and I found myself utterly bored with Guns Akimbo just a few minutes in.

Despite the title being a callback to the retro first person shooter Blood from '96, I think the most obvious inspiration here (very likely not on purpose) were actually modern games like Fortnite. Just throw everything that people are going to recognize at the wall with no rhyme or reason and hope anything sticks, but there's no clear design philosophy or original idea behind it. I'm so tired of everything being based on unending pop culture quotes these days, can we please move on and create new pop culture instead?

You see bits and pieces of Edgar Wright, the Kick-Ass films, a little bit of Dredd, sprinkles of Crank and even John Wick. Basically all the original, exciting or funny action taste-makers of the last decade and a half. You can do that kind of post-modern quote extravaganza, I love these films too, but you either have to one-up them or at least be as good. Just adding neon colors and a video game UI overlay isn't enough to safe very pedestrian action scenes and an overlong underwritten plot.

Let's briefly talk about the soundtrack too. Just stylistically the incessant score doesn't work because the movie has nothing to do with 8-bit arcade chip-tunes or 80s style wave, it's obviously based on 90s first person shooters, filled with references to them left and right. A more suitable score then would have been midi knock-offs of famous metal tunes or something driving and heavy like the Doom Eternal soundtrack. During action scenes the movie sometimes switches to ironically cheerful covers of "rock songs you've heard in movies a million times vol.1 and 2", because we can't not copy even more of Kick-Ass now, can we? I get it though. The sort of very graphical primary colors faux-80s design, with lots of vectors and the paintbrush tool from Adobe Illustrator, set to retro music is a ready-made, depressingly current, recognizable style. You don't have to come up with your own one then.

On a technical level none of this is made terribly, but if you lack ideas this badly you really have to stun with execution and for a movie so set on being edgy and in your face it's surprisingly low energy and filled with safe and bland choices. It feels incredibly desperate to be cool, to be liked, to be a cult hit. As someone who is part of quite a few weird movie cults, the idea of a manufactured instant cult hit is both flabbergasting and borderline offensive to me. At this point the term "cult hit" is nothing more than a defense strategy by bad filmmakers to protect their work against legitimate criticism.

I'm sure it'll find its audience and it will sell on the novelty of that Harry Potter kid dropping F-bombs in a violent movie, but if you want your Daniel Radcliffe indie fix you'll be better served with Swiss Army Man or Horns.

Shopping (1994)

Impressive debut

[6/10 · 18 January 2022]

Paul W. S. Anderson is an enigma to me. When you listen to him talk about films or games he comes off as quite knowledgeable, curious and self-reflective, yet he's made nothing but terrible schlock throughout the entirety of his career. Sometimes he makes an accidentally good film like Event Horizon or Alien vs Predator but the limits of his imagination and skill are painfully apparent even in the best of his work, and borderline cringeworthy in his worst, see M for Mortal Kombat or Monster Hunter.

Shopping was his debut film, which while receiving mixed reviews became somewhat of a cult hit in the UK upon release and helped usher in a new wave of british cinema. In hindsight, without the success of Shopping we might not have gotten the careers of Danny Boyle or Guy Ritchie (ok , that sounds like a mixed blessing).

Wait, what? Paul W. S. Anderson is british?!

The strangest epiphany other than the fact he can direct when he wants to, is that he's actually british, which was so surprising to me since none of his usual films have the humour, inventiveness or bite you get from the other british filmmakers of this era. Shopping is this fascinating anomaly in his career, a visually inventive cool little indie action film, inhabited by some of the greatest accents of the island, driven forward by a temporary electronica soundtrack. The cast includes an array of later Anderson regulars in a rare display of their native lingo, several well-known brits of the time in small parts and the feature film debut of Jude Law who shockingly is the worst actor in the film. I genuinely like him, but at this point he had so much left to learn it's not even funny.

The scenery is one of the stars, making use of a couple of famous London brutalist landmarks, a style of architecture which had already lent Clockwork Orange it's slightly futuristic dystopian touch. While the low budget is apparent, Anderson is smart enough to shoot around it, so it never becomes a distraction.

The story isn't the movie's strongest suit ultimately running a bit too long. Maybe a more well-versed lead might have carried it better, but a lot of time is spent on plotlines that could have been dealt with much quicker and more elegantly. This isn't a high concept thriller. It's a rather simple fictional portray of a disenchanted youth culture always in search of more extreme thrills which leads to crime, carnage and casualties. An entire clique of rebels without a cause. The movie does tap a little bit into contemporary british subcultures which makes it an interesting watch as a time capsule of the mid-nineties. What lay buried in the shadow of britpop.

It's not necessarily a great film by any means, it has these moments of imitation and lack of experience that hold down most debut films, but it shows Paul W. S. Anderson once briefly had his finger on the pulse of the times instead of desperately chasing after it, and it's a riveting look into an alternate timeline where instead of moving to Hollywood, he decided to hone his craft at home, polish his skills and vision and emerge a unique filmmaker with his own style instead of the unoriginal repetitive junk he's been cluttering up theatres with for the last 27 years.

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998)

Doesn't hold up that well

[5/10 · 17 January 2022]

This is one of those particular indie movies that had everyone clamoring for more at release, but like any mediocre stage magician the illusion can't be kept up for too long and the duct tape is showing everywhere once you look closer.

Now Guy Ritchie has managed to pull the wool over everyone's eyes for long enough to build a career on this and a few of his later films are actually good, but his debut, especially with 20+ years of hindsight is nowhere near as good as I remembered it.

Now I still love the british-ness of it all and the actors involved, but it's crystal clear this was assembled from an array of much better movies, mostly Tarantino, Scorsese and sprinkles of Boyle, with barely an original fibre in its body.

Convoluted plot, a hip decade-bending soundtrack, tough as nails baddies with swanky nicknames and and a gang of too cool for school protagonists doing their witty banter back and forth. Tell me where you've heard that before and I can assure you you've already seen it done better and more effortlessly.

There's something so incredibly fake about all the forced street coolness and toughness of this film, that it began to bore me to such a degree I couldn't even finish it this time. In fact there's something transparently fake about all of Guy Ritchie's gangster films, even when they work better. Once you read up about his incredibly privileged upbringing his attempts to mime both the british mob swagger and rough underclass charme become almost comical.

Being desperate to be seen as cool is the opposite of cool and nowhere is this more apparent than here.

Apart from the derivativeness and myriad stylistic mis-steps I don't think the movie is made all that well as just a piece of entertainment. It never really picks up speed despite the twists and turns of the plot, Ritchie seems indecisive how serious we should take the violence and the story and in the end it's all just a giant hodgepodge of half-ideas lacking a coherent vision or voice of its own, unless randomly over-exposing your shots counts as vision.

May entice you more when you only watch it once, but for anyone else who remembers enjoying this film back in the day and who has seen other films in the genre since, I advice you to refrain from a repeat viewing.

Dead Leaves (2004)

A statement piece

[8/10 · 11 January 2022]

This is what happens when some of the most talented and creative people in japanimation get really drunk. A vulgar, violent, sexy caleidoscope of an acid trip that is simultaneously a love letter to japanimation and a parody of all its cliches, set to driving Yoko Kanno beats. In short it's plain freakin' awesome.

This came out around the same time as Masaaki Yuasa's mindgame and even almost 20 years later both still feel like the future of animation. Yuasa with his sketchy lines and paintbrush beauty, Imaishi with his vector-like graphical clarity and excess.

The story of Dead Leaves is simple. Two convicts from a lunar prison facility, Pandy and Retro, awaken on earth with no memory of their past and immediately get pursued by the cops. Wickedness and shenanigans ensue.

It's definitely a unique trip and a good introduction to Hiroyuki Imaishi's aesthetic that continues to evolve and refine, as evidenced in the recent opus Promare which managed to gain a more mainstream audience than Dead Leaves will ever have. Which is by design mind you.

It's beautiful madness from beginning to end, gleefully indulgent in sex and violence which are both played for laughs and can be exhausting if you don't know what you're in for. That is not to say it's ever just random. Every frame despite the excess is drawn with a level of taste, purpose and clarity that is rather unique to this day. It's basically the visualization of a great electro punk album and a testament to the creativity of Japanese animators. A promise to the future by Imaishi that he continues to keep.

Makes for a great double feature with his more recent short "Sex and violence with mach speed".

This Filthy World (2006)

Nuggets of wisdom from the filth elder himself

[8/10 · 11 January 2022]

"All young people need someone bad to look up to and I hope I can be that for you"

This is a recording of John Waters's stand-up material recorded on the road. Rather than a regular comedy stand-up it's a revue of his personal and professional life from his early life, his classic entourage including the immortal Divine, all the way to the present. It's filled with wonderful anecdotes and genuinely inspiring wisdom for artists or everyone really. But that doesn't mean it's not also hilarious.

Far from being a self-aggrandizing kitsch fest this is actually rather self-deprecating and gives a lot of love and credit to all the artists and people who have proven to be influential on John Waters's life, among them a quote particularly butch stripper who looked like Johnny Cash who turned out to be one of his earliest artistic influences.

This filthy world has the same mixture of irreverent dark humour and love for the weirdos, outcasts and underdogs that make his feature films so remarkable and enduring. It's oddly uplifting and inspiring. Even if you're not a fan of Waters's work yet you'll get something out of it, but of course the entertainment value is multiplied if you know the people he is talking about.

The Butterfly Murders (1979)

Impressive directorial debut

[6/10 · 11 January 2022]

Tsui Hark has one of the most unique voices of the Hong Kong new wave that revolutionized action cinema, kung fu and comedy in the late 70s and gave us a deep well of remarkable treasures that has yet to run out. Visually he is certainly among the best in the business, not only in Hong Kong, both as a director and a producer. The Once upon a time in China and Chinese ghost story series being particularly impressive examples of his prowess.

Butterfly Murders already contains many of his future hallmarks, especially in the imaginative cinematography. It's basically a blend of Kung Fu action and Giallo which I had yet to see. As such it is not fully successful. The visuals are quite amazing, very distinct and cinematic. They foreshadow both his own career and the new trajectory of Hong Kong cinema at the nadier of the more theatrical Shaw brothers productions. The limited setting is suspenseful and well utilized. The mystery story setup is also quite intriguing at first, but the conclusion left a few things left to be desired. The same goes for the fight scenes, which aren't done badly by any means but lack the fluency, creativity and splendor you associate with Tsui Hark. It appears he had yet to learn to marry the hypnotic beauty of his narrative shots with his action shots.

It's an entertaining romp throughout, so I don't want to come down on it too harshly, but it should or at least could have crescendoed to a true classic. I usually wouldn't suggest such a thing, but maybe this material could be made to shine with a remake by the master himself.

Pink Flamingos (1972)

Divine wholesome filth

[8/10 · 11 January 2022]

It sounds ironic to suggest John Waters knew exactly what he was doing when he made Pink Flamingos fifty years ago, because to the untrained eye it looks like it was made by someone who not only never made a movie but most likely didn't even see one before.

Yet this remains simultaneously one of the all-time endearing cult movies for every misfit of every generation and ilk, and one of the scariest movies ever for people pretending to stand for morality and decency. It can't be beaten. It will never not be controversial. And it will never cease to be funny and endlessly quotable.

You see, and this is somewhat of a bastardized quote from Waters' standup show "this filthy world", there are two types of bad taste. The first is just the absence of good taste, the second is knowing what good taste is and taking a big dump on it, which is basically the mission statement of John's artistic oeuvre.

But what is Pink Flamingos even about, other than you forever associating "surfin' bird" with a singing rectum and nothing else until the day you die? Well, it's an all-american slice of life family drama centered on the mother of the house, Divine (as herself), aka the filthiest person alive who gets sabotaged in her pursuit of infamy by a duo of shady characters. If this description sounds a bit stilted I apologize. Given the nature of this film it's quite taxing to avoid violating imdb review standards on swear words.

What makes this movie so endearing is that it is so original and honest. You witness virtually all the repulsive acts that are legal to put on film, set to a heart-warming solid gold selection of oldies and despite or maybe because of how unrepentingly strange they are you grow very fond of the host of characters dwelling in this particularly homely slice of desolate americana. This is another important ingredient to what makes John Waters movies in general so great and strangely wholesome: you never look down on the "weirdos" they depict. You never feel like you're laughing at Edith the egg lady, you're laughing and enjoying life alongside her.

The true villains, the true ugliness as in real life are the people trying to shut down those they deem different and less worthy. This element of rooting for the underdog is present to varying degrees in all of Waters's movies and gives them such longevity. Pink Flamingos will probably never not be relevant. Whenever I watch it I feel like I'm coming home to a dysfunctional but caring family that occassionally indulges in cannibalism and murder, but loves me for who I am.

It's trash and it's proud of it and so am I. Here's to another fifty years.

Aachi & Ssipak (2005)

Underappreciated animated middle finger

[8/10 · 11 January 2022]

In the shadow of the South Korean movie hype that brought masters like Bong Joon Ho into the international limelight there was also a small but unique movement to emancipate the country as a quality provider of animated features in its own right, and not just a cheap location for Japan and the US to outsource their inbetweening to. Echoing the same development rival Japan went through when it emerged in the eighties as an animation powerhouse. Unfortunately, close to 15 years later now, 2D animation hasn't taken off to the same degree in South Korea despite the undeniable qualities of movies like Yobi the five tailed fox, wonderful days or this vulgar gem whose title I literally can't translate into English because it would violate imdb language standards.

Aachi & Ssipak is a satirical view of modern mass media with a few subtle stabs at North Korea and many not so subtle references to classic movies, spiced up with a very dark and crass sense of humour.

In the future the only remaining energy source is fecal matter, hence feces become quasi-religious symbols. Citizens get rewarded for their business with lollipop-like drugs that eventually turn them into tiny smurf-esque creatures called the diaper gang that can only live on these drugs and thus roam the cities and desolate wastelands as marauding scavengers.

...It all makes a little more sense in the context of the movie...

Despite the cartoonish look this isn't a movie for children (unless you're a really cool parent). It's filled with sexuality, graphic violence and vulgar slang (especially in the original Korean dub). Yet it never feels like it's trying to be edgy, it just has this natural offbeat punkrock FU attitude that you will either love or hate. I find it intensely likeable myself.

Give it a chance and you'll be rewarded with something very unique and unironically some of the best animated action scenes in recent memory.

Promare (2019)

Madness

[7/10 · 10 January 2022]

Hiroyuki Imaishi of Dead Leaves and Kill la Kill fame has been one of my favorite people in animation for years and once again he didn't disappoint, this was absolutely mad next level.

The characters and story are a bit underwritten for the length of the movie, and it could have used more of Imaishi's trademark irreverent humour, but the true star here is of course the wild animation which is an almost distractingly crisp mixture of 2D and 3D that blends incredibly well.

I usually hate toon shaders outside of video games but this was done masterfully. Promare always manages to stay visually legible and firmly inside the language of japanime despite the absolute overkill of colours, shapes and movement. And I do mean overkill, this was crazy. Half of these colours I didn't even know existed, and I work in graphic design and illustration! Yet it never gets messy in any way. The design and composition are done with such a very keen eye it's rare you get an image that isn't an absolute banger.

It actually takes a little while to get your eyes acquainted to. Even if you're familiar with studio trigger's work this is probably unlike anything you've seen before.

Your mileage may vary though, it can be exhausting but it's a fresh style that made me hungry for more.

Left Behind (I) (2014)

Actually somewhat amusing

[2/10 · 9 January 2022]

A 2/10 movie with a 5/10 Nic Cage performance based on a ludicrous premise done somewhat competently.

The crux of all these left behind films is, even if you believe the premise it doesn't make much sense in their own universe or even theologically. Raptures may have enjoyed a long tradition in several religions, including christianity, but they're not really much of a focal point in christian eschatological teachings despite US-american christian right-wing's obsession with it. It seems like every year another pastor has 100% reliably predicted the date of the rapture, only for the date to pass and nothing continuing to happen. It's pretty hilarious from the outside, so some of that entertainment value translates to this piece of uniquely american christian propaganda.

I'll give Left Behind a teensy bit of credit for not being as mean-spirited and disgusting as other christsploitation flicks and for not indulging too much in evangelical persecution complexes, but this movie is still fraught with odd beliefs delivered in the most ham-fisted preachy way.

Visually the rapture is the comedic highlight and all the dramatic camera swoops over pieces of clothing lying in the dirt or on chairs surrounded by flabbergasted onlookers don't sell them as a frightening sign of the apocalypse.

Apparently the whole world is sunk into chaos and tohuvabohu by this event, and we collectively as a species turned the civilisation knob all the way to Mad Max 2 in an instant, as soon as little Timmy popped out of his baseball shirt and his earthly existence.

I don't doubt such an incident would cause untold grief to many, but it doesn't actually look like that many people were zoomed up into the heavens or that the ones not saved were exclusively nasty murderous criminals which would explain the hellish conditions the earth is now in.

Apparently the only folks lucky enough to prove worthy were proseletizing fundamentalist christians, new-born babies, prepubescent children, all air traffic controllers worldwide and even the entirety of tele-communications satellites? This is where the theology gets really blurry and the premise wonky beyond repair, even if you were to believe it in the first place. If you actually read the bible (and I did, mind you) the rules on how to be a good person, how to be a good christian for that matter can be incredibly arbitrary (have you ever eaten shellfish? Then so long, pearly gates) and even contradictory, so good luck earning your way into heaven. Which leads to the next problem: despite popular misconception, in christian teaching the only path to the kingdom of heaven is accepting Jesus, unlike in other faiths (including abrahamitic ones like judaism) where you prove righteous through your deeds. Hence by that logic babies couldn't actually get saved and with them a substantial amount of good people who haven't accepted Jesus but are otherwise living ethical lives. So yeah, the film's premise doesn't even make sense in its own universe. This is one of the reasons ideas of a big rapture aren't prominent features in most christian denominations, it doesn't even appear in revelations as a sign of the endtimes. While Left Behind is ostensibly made as christian propaganda, it thus feels much more like christian fan fiction.

However there is a smidgen of residual entertainment value in its intrinsic ridiculousness. It's not as cheap-looking as other exemplars of the genre, so you can actually physically watch it from beginning to end without gritting your teeth at every technical detail of the production. Nicolas Cage is entertaining, especially when he looks like he's forced against his will to appear in a movie, but in general the premise is beyond stupid especially if you are a christian and even subtly disgusting the more you think about it.

As a very devout non-believer this was actually somewhat funny to watch though. If you're into unintentionally revealing trash flicks this might be up your alley, but come prepared, this one is getting preachy as hell. Just as a film in itself though it's a catastrophe.

Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City (2021)

One third of a good movie

[4/10 · 9 January 2022]

In the canon of video game movie adaptations the Resident Evil films live on in infamy. Not even starting on a particularly strong note they managed to get progressively worse and goofy. I don't mind them that much, the final three or so are so bad they are almost cute, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't mind a good adaptation of the Resident Evil games which may have their own flaws but are among the most recognizable iconic game franchises and deserve a better treatment.

The classic Resident Evil games aren't particularly deep or subtle. They knew how to have fun with the zombie survival scenario though and offered a barrage of comical bad guys to spice things up. Some of these positives translate into the new movie, albeit in a limited fashion.

After the unbearably cliche opening scene in the spooky orphanage that was copy-pasted from countless forgettable "horror" movies of the 2010s this new RE iteration actually starts off a little promising. Ignoring the older movies and more recent games completely, it takes us all the way back to the original two installments set in 1998, centered in and around Raccoon city. Many memorable moments are echoed here, yet enough is changed around so that the scenario feels more like it's own world.

In the games Raccoon City is deliberately given not that much character, it's a stand-in for any mid-sized north american city, so I quite enjoyed the change to a dying small town in the middle of nowhere everyone is trying to get out of as fast as they can. Being sent here for a job feels like a sentence. Everybody is bored and drunk, the local evil mega conglomerate Umbrella has poisoned the waters with their chemicals yet whoever is too poor to leave just rolls with it in a sort of fatal pragmatism. This is all too relatable for someone who had to spend pre-internet years of his life in a similar dead-end town. This whole setup and the character interactions are easily the best part of the film but I think it may have been the first big misstep to shoehorn in all the well-known characters from here on out.

While I don't mind the changes done to their designs and personalities, it's all a bit too much and draws attention to itself in a way that is distracting. Fans will be annoyed by characters referring to each other by full name so you know which one is which, newcomers will be confused why some curly-haired dude being named Leon S. Kennedy is given so much attention. It doesn't add much that they are represented and if you've played the games it also spoils the story, since they didn't change enough to leave room for any surprises. I do have to admit the Jill sandwich reference did get a little chuckle out of me though.

Just about when the horror in this horror film allegedly starts to happen the whole production crumbles like a proverbial cookie from 1998. While the locations, story elements and visuals of the games are recreated quite well, certainly leagues beyond the Paul W. S. Anderson series, it's all for nought. There's never any tension, no build-up, no sense of urgency or dread. The zombies aren't scary, our heroes aren't captivating, the violence is boring. Everybody just sleepwalks through the rural zombie apocalypse all the way to the end. Eventually it feels like a practical joke, especially the character of Leon who is played entirely for laughs. Shockingly enough I find the rare bits of intentional comedy, like the foul-mouthed middle-aged police chief to be much more fun and entertaining than the unappealing sludge from whence all the "horror" stuff came. Had the whole movie been made as a horror comedy satirizing the more absurd elements of Resident Evil and zombie cinema, that kind of bold, creative decision might have made for a genuinely good movie. As it stands it's both a bad game adaptation and a bad zombie movie. What could have been the first good Resident Evil movie eventually ends up being its worst and most tedious iteration. I struggled to stay awake through the last half hour and half an hour after leaving the cinema I already struggle to remember anything from the film other than the ludicrous mid-credit scene that did however conclusively convince me the whole shebang was a joke after all.

Snow Trail (1947)

A great winter watch

[7/10 · 9 January 2022]

A group of bank robbers flee into the Japanese alps to escape the police. After barely getting away from their hideout the path behind them is cut off by an avalanche and they have to hole up in a cabin whose friendly inhabitants know nothing of their true nature.

This was a really pleasant surprise. I didn't expect all that much since the only Taniguchi film I had seen before was the rather dull Lost world of Sinbad which ironically left me entirely cold.

The beauty and danger of these mountains is captured amazingly well, especially for the time. All I could think of was how this couldn't have been an easy production as I watched the actors struggle to move in meters of snow, scaling cliffs and looking insignificantly small in the vast landscapes.

This movie has an interesting pedigree to begin with, being the first film to bring Toshiro Mifune and long time acting partner Takashi Shimura together. It's also the first score of composer Akira Ifukube, most famous for the Godzilla soundtracks (and original roar) as well as the Burmese Harp and countless others.

Mifune is great as the young, cruel, greedy and unpredictable thug, who seems like a man who never came back from the war, but Shimura as the older, melancholic boss opposite of him takes the cake here.

The script by none other than Akira Kurosawa elevates what could have been a rather standard thriller of the time, by adding a lot of layers and nuance to the story.

While the war is never mentioned explicitly it looms large (hell it was barely two years ago at the time). More often than not it feels like a movie about soldiers coming home from war and unraveling rather than a mountaineering adventure. Our main characters are all clearly damaged. I'm sure if you had been in the audience back then you would have picked up on a lot more of these hints. Yet typical for a Kurosawa script there's a shimmer of hope and humanity that shines like a beacon through the dense mist.

While this isn't quite a masterpiece yet it has a strong atmosphere of solitude and a sweet mix of hopefulness and melancholia. It deserves to be much more widely seen and appreciated. If you like early Kurosawa or Naruse I definitely recommend it.

One Cut of the Dead (2017)

I love this movie

[8/10 · 9 January 2022]

One cut of the dead or as it is known in its original language: "don't stop the camera" was one of the biggest surprise hits in Japanese cinematic history. Originally released in 2017, shot on a miniscule budget, it was still playing local cinemas whilst I was living in Osaka all throughout 2018 and 2019. Eventually it got picked up for worldwide distribution and conquered the international market too with its unique blend of humour, creativity and warmth.

The synopsis fortunately gives only a tiny glimpse into the twists and turns this movie has to offer: An indie movie team is shooting a cheap zombie flick in an abandoned factory when real zombies start to show up all of a sudden. That is not the twist mind you, just the setup for the first act which is good fun in and of itself but only a small portion of what makes the whole thing so endearing. The first half hour is done all in one shot, making creative use of its limited budget yet there is something distinctly strange about how this scenario plays out, which won't be revealed until much later in the film.

I won't give anything away beyond the synopsis, but you can look forward to One cut of the dead completely shifting gears and genres at the beginning of each act. Eventually everything comes together in the end in a way that is smart, hilarious, incredibly satisfying and genuinely heart-warming. I think it's a shame this is mostly being advertised as a zombie comedy a la Shaun of the Dead which it most definitely is not, so do yourself a favor and give it a shot, even if you think the beginning looks a bit cheap and bad. It's not a flaw it's the joke. Stick with it and you will be rewarded with one of the best movies I've seen in years.

Director Shinichiro Ueda is one to watch. His recent film Special Actors also shared this unique blend of characteristics.

The Human Bullet (1968)

Depressing, surreal, savage and hilarious

[7/10 · 9 January 2022]

Okamoto is a director that seems to get very little exposure outside of his most famous work Sword of Doom. Few know his equally bleak and gorgeous Samurai Assassin and I've yet to encounter anyone who has seen Human Bullet which is a shame, because it is an incredibly unique piece of war satire.

The movie which takes place in the final days of world war 2 is centred on a gangly little guy trying to make his way through the war in search of sex, a glorious death or at least some rest, which luckily for him eventually earns him a post manning a torpedo in the middle of nowhere in wait for any american ships to pass by. This wrap-around story is complemented by scenes of his previous experiences in the absurd mechanism that is the military. There's a very dark humorous edge here you don't find that often outside of Catch22. I think many anti-war movies make the mistake of showing war as constant horrific violence to get across its destructive nature, yet when you read memoirs of soldiers from the world wars their description sounds more like long stretches of mind-numbing boredom interspersed with sudden bursts of unbelievable trauma followed by a terrible silence, and their life through all of this is being controlled and held together by an apparatus that doesn't really knows what it's doing and just follows rules that were written by people who clearly didn't have bullets whizzing around them all day. There's always a dispassionate bureaucratic edge to war and the commitment of its atrocities that to me is truly more frightening than anything else. Human Bullet gets this absurd juxtaposition down extremely well.

I can imagine many of the strange situations in this film might be based on Okamoto's own life. He was in the precise age range that got used as cannon fodder by the thousands in order to stave off the inevitable defeat of imperial Japan. There's often a bleakness and grimness to many other directors from that generation especially people like Kinji Fukasaku. Yet Human Bullet never loses its humour despite the morose nature of its narrative and thus feels a lot more like its contemporary Japanese nouvelle vague films whose directors tended to be a bit younger and inspired by 60s counter culture. This is underlined by a nice little narrative bow to 1960s Japan and its careless youth. At times Human Bullet is downright cute and plays more like a live action manga than anything else. It's incredibly dense with subtle humour and commentary and thus warrants repeat viewings. After Samurai Assassin and this one I definitely feel compelled to do a deeper dive into Okamoto's filmography.

Labyrinth of Cinema (2019)

Defies any attempt to be reviewed

[6/10 · 9 January 2022]

Being the final film of the recently departed Nobuhiko Obayashi I watched this with one laughing and one crying eye. Obayashi was known for his visuals, humour and wild even experimental style. A prime example being 1977's Hausu which has become somewhat of a cult classic by now and for good reason too as it is a perfect destillation of all his greatest qualities.

Labyrinth of Cinema is an even more extreme example of his style which is both joyfully wonderful and ultimately a detriment.

The wrap-around story is about the last movie theatre in Onomichi city, Obayashi's birthplace, closing its doors forever with an all-night showing of Japanese war films. This attracts a colorful variety of odd characters who get sucked into the movies themselves and the historic events they portray.

What follows is a 3-hour long very meta, often funny, often tragic trip through 400 years of history and 100 years of cinema with the focus being on world war II, Japanese atrocities against their own and other people and ultimately Obayashi's own experience of being a child during the Japanese Empire including the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.

Despite what this may sound like the message of the film is actually very positive and uplifting yet doesn't really mince words when it comes to humanity's destructive capabilities.

The fact that this movie even exists is inspiring in itself. Obayashi was diagnosed with terminal cancer in 2016 and given only a few months to live, yet he still completed this film and another three hour epic Hanagatami before it.

What makes Labyrinth of Cinema a much lesser film than it could have been is the complete and at times ridiculous oversaturation of style, which makes it really hard to recommend. It becomes quite exhausting very quickly. While it does get better and eventually allows important emotional scenes to breathe more it was still too much for me. And I'm usually a big fan of the sensory overload approach to art.

With more restraint this could have easily been a more epic live action version of Satoshi Kon's Millenium Actress. Still, the joy and energy this dying old artist brought to the screen in his final film is inspiring and there is plenty of good commentary that really packs a punch.

It's not going to be for everybody, if you're not well-versed in Japanese history, culture and cinema a lot of the details will go straight over your head, but I'm sincerely glad I saw it and wow, what a way to go.

Battle for Sevastopol (2015)

Too many misfires for a story that should write itself

[4/10 · 6 January 2022]

The real story of Lyudmila Pavlichenko, deadliest female sniper of all time and one of the top 10 most successful after all, is fascinating enough in itself that it wouldn't need embellishment, but of course movies aren't reality and even documentaries tend to be manipulative one way or the other, so here we are.

What is harder to ignore is the fact those same embellishments tend to diminish Pavlichenko's accomplishments.

By now I've seen enough films to know I may have some issues with the current state of Russian cinema. While I hold its indie cinema darlings like Lopushansky and Zvyagintsev dearly, and all of soviet era cinema is a treasure trove of often unexpected masterpieces, contemporary Russian mainstream movies tend to be filled with thick pathos, bad acting, unpleasant stereotypes and even propaganda, minus the budget and kitsch value that makes their similarly tainted and flawed US counterparts so entertaining. A rare but welcome counter-example being a movie like Salyut 7.

Battle for Sevastopol aka Red Sniper had my hopes up for a bit by not immediately going as deep into the pathos and romantization of world war 2 and the red army, although there remain trace elements. Particularly the depiction of pre-war Soviet union just a year or two after Stalin's great purge as a literal pastel-colored wonderland seems tasteless at best, revisionist at worst.

Most of the demonization of the USSR in western media is sensationalized too of course, but in over-correcting to such a degree it does a disservice to the historical accuracy it otherwise adhers to.

I will give the movie quite a bit of credit for actually being thoughtfully critical of certain elements of the Red Army which is rare. Ironically there are many recycled elements from the superior Enemy at the Gates that was at the time mercilessly bashed by russian critics for doing exactly that.

Director Sergey Mokritskiy who is perhaps more famous as a cinematographer does a great job enriching the film with creative and pleasing visuals. While the smaller budget compared to many western productions remains visible it's never a distraction.

There are also some attempts to give Pavlichenko some psychological depth too, making her out to be more than patriotic poster art. There is humanity, struggle, love and post-traumatic stress in soldiers (that we generally still don't talk about nearly enough) alas how many of this was handled is the movie's biggest problem in my book.

There's no use bandying about, despite ostensibly celebrating a real life warrior and heroine to many the movie is deeply rooted in outdated stereotypes that become harder to ignore the longer it goes on.

Here's this real person, who volunteered to be in the dangerous and psychologically taxing profession that was the sniper corps, excelled at it, survived grave injuries many times and yet kept fighting as long as she was physically able to and thus helped stem the tide of German expansion on the eastern front.

And yet if you are to believe this movie and virtually every character in it her only value as a human being is not derived from her dedication, intelligence or her deeds, no, it is based solely on her value as a woman, to be precise on how desirable she is to the men in her life and how many children she might give them.

I know this sounds like I'm reading way too much into this but bear with me. Lots of war films have love stories in them too, for better or worse, as a trope this deserves some scrutiny but strictly historically speaking, being in a war has never stopped people from falling in love, so I don't think including a love story is intrinsically bad or outdated, in fact it can give a lot of humanity to an otherwise unworldly horror scenario like a war.

However many characters here go out of their way to treat Lyudmilla like this poor little woman that should have been protected better by the strong men in her life. The only character telling her it doesn't matter if you're a man or a woman when you're a soldier is made out to be a villain. There's also an extended recurring plotline about how many men desperately want to be Lyudmilla's lover that is as unnecessary as it is creepy. Among them was a persistent doctor named Boris who for the life of me I couldn't figure out if the depiction of him and his family wasn't actually some kind of anti-semitic dogwhistle. A lot to unpack here, most of which really rubbed me the wrong way...

Beyond the subtext (which was mostly text to be honest) the movie often fails in execution itself. Jumping back and forth between different locations and time periods dissolves tension and makes for an uneven viewing. A lot of the acting, especially by the badly ADRed russians playing americans was questionable to laughable. Main actress Yulia Peresild as Pavlichenko was a standout performance, but she looked very uncomfortable with a rifle, which probably should have been avoided in a movie about a master sharp-shooter.

All in all a very uneven film with many questionable elements that drag it down even further.

Spiral (2021)

unintentionally fascinating

[3/10 · 6 January 2022]

Sometimes you know from the first minute or so whether a movie is going to be good, bad or even a masterpiece. The language, the magic if you will, of cinema at play.

Spiral (from the book of trying to make a title sound more interesting and weighty than it is) revealed itself early on in similar fashion.

Although the title suggests it, it is unfortunately not based on the eponymous Junji Ito manga but the Saw series which started off as a stylish modernization of serial killer tropes and through a series of increasingly ridiculous sequels eventually reached the comedy genre to become somewhat entertaining again. Spiral is rather devoid of either category. In fact it's but a mere husk of a film that ends up being almost endearingly bad.

There are a few real actors in there (ok, two, and a picture of Jigsaw Tobin Bell himself which tends to out-act everyone else in the scene it's in), the director to my shock and amazement has made other films before (among them the unbearable pseudo-goth kitsch Repo) and things you're supposed to be looking at are usually in frame. Yet something about this is so jarringly off. Is there a term like the uncanny valley but for when a product is almost a movie?

Whether it's the floaty directionless cinematography, desinterested blocking, the odd line deliveries of obvious first draft dialogue or the weird facial expressions everyone is doing constantly. There are some clumsy attempts to revitalize the stylish editing and camera work that gave Saw its unique look back in the day, that are as laughable as they are mercifully brief. Just the bread and butter basics of filmmaking are done so shoddily you can probably show this thing in film class as an example how not to make a movie. Now I get the limitations of film production during the pandemic and this was probably shot with a skeleton crew to fill in all the boring story bits between the comical contraption gore scenes, but you would hope that crew would at least include a DP or someone who knows what continuity is. The latter is something I usually don't pay too much attention to, since the flow of a scene is in my opinion more important than continuity, but it became really distracting.

With a product (I hesitate to call it a film) this bad and strange the closest visual analogy I can think of would be an unfinished indie video game where half the assets won't load and someone forgot to replace the placeholder animations and characters with the finalized versions. It's like something made by aliens who don't fully understand human anatomy or storytelling. Safe for the brief moment Chris Rock slips back into his character from New Jack City that oddness is literally the only enjoyment I got out of this. The brief bouts of graphic violence didn't lure me from the comfy lull of boredom.

Now for the story, ugh, it's a Saw film, you know how these go. Hard boiled cop, yada yada, plot twists, villain monologue, etc.

I'm sure I've seen it done worse, I can't say for certain since for the life of me I can't remember anything from the series beyond the first two parts.

Watch these instead, they hold up pretty well, or don't. At this point it's difficult to not let your enjoyment of them be tainted by the disaster that is the rest of the series. So yeah, going back to horror films with "spiral" in the title watch uzumaki instead, even if you hate it you will have felt something.

Hobo with a Shotgun (2011)

70 minutes too long

[3/10 · 6 January 2022]

It's a good title and a cute little grindhousy idea for sure, the late Rutger Hauer is great as ever but this shouldn't have moved a second beyond the 15 minute mark if it needed to be anything more than a faux trailer at all.

Doing cheapo trash from the 60s and 70s justice is harder than it sounds, because that particular brand of sleaze flicks had the benefit of looking like movies and having both teeth and balls. Even if their cinematic value is debatable they were pretty punk rock before that genre even existed. The over-the-top nature whether it's in the acting, the sex or the violence, was a deliberate counter movement to the Hollywood system and a refreshing affront to the conga line of moral panics over avantgarde youth- and sub-cultures of the day. Sometimes it was merely exploitive garbage made for a quick buck.

You have to have an eye for many minute details and a deep love and understanding of the material to get any kind of hommage or revival right and outside of Rob Zombie's the devil's rejects and post-Kill Bill Tarantino I'm not sure anyone has really pulled it off.

Hobo with a shotgun feels like it was made by people who only saw the grindhouse features through the aforementioned Tarantino/Rodriguez/Zombie lens and decided to make their own version with their trusted Sony Handycam, a few friends who were really sure they can act, and the color saturation slider firmly glued to the highest setting. The term trying too hard is thrown around a lot, hey what's the harm in at least trying? Well, there's no harm in trying to make a movie a certain way but you can't make an audience react a certain way which this was trying to do. You can't create a cult hit, it has to grow on its own, usually at the cost of creating misery and hardship for the creative minds behind it who won't receive appreciation for the creative work until decades later and usually don't make a living from it.

Hobo with a shotgun belongs on a 10 movie dvd pack in the bargain bin.

Gokuaku kenpô (1974)

Rightfully forgotten or not?

[5/10 · 28 October 2021]

Shigehiro Ozawa of Street Fighter fame (that is to say the Hissatsuken series with Sonny Chiba and Sue Shiomi which features very little street fighting) brings us a martial arts flick set around the time of the first world war when Japan was just about to enter on the side of the allies.

Centrepiece to the story is a group of spies called the Eastern Wolves running counter espionage for the japanese government against Russia and Germany, who are joined by the rough new recruit with the iron fists aptly named Tekken played by Tsunehiko Watase, who is doing his best Sonny Chiba impression. Apparently spy work in 1914 consisted entirely of beating people up with fists.

What follows is a fairly standard brawler of the time. There is some fun stuff here and there like the beautiful ketchup-red blood fountains of the era but it never quite reaches the same level of entertainment and charisma as its direct competitor Street Fighter.

What is also a big disappointment is the lack of use of the unfamiliar setting of the rarely seen Taisho era japan. Generally historical films tend to focus almost exclusively on WWII imperial japan, the warring states period or the Edo period. This could have been set in any time and it wouldn't have made a difference in how the plot unfolded.

I think the reason this film is mostly forgotten (I appear to be the first to rate it on imdb) and incredibly hard to find is that all of its ingredients are calibrated to bog standard with the keen eye of a master craftsman. I caught it randomly in Osaka's Shinsekai Toei cinema that plays a weekly new selection of Toei's back catalogue.

It's not bad though. Certainly more watchable than some of its contemporaries like Norifumi Suzuki's films that even made it into the west. There's a brief appearance by Tokusatsu legend Masashi Ishibashi and it briefly delves into and then quickly abandones the topic of anti-chinese discrimination.

It may have fared better with a more well-known lead like the aforementioned Sonny Chiba and some tweaks to the storyline.

The New York Times Presents: Framing Britney Spears (2021) Season 1, Episode 6

heartbreaking but also problematic

[6/10 · 30 June 2021]

At the height of her fame Britney Spears was one of the most successful pop stars in history, which was followed by a very public breakdown under the earth-shattering thunder of clicking paparazzi cameras, eventually resulting in an ongoing conservatorship that frankly should have raised many an eyebrow a lot sooner.

This is a documentary about the subject, which has some interesting segments but ultimately fails to be as illuminating as it could have been.

The most interesting part to me was the first half, chronicling Britney's well-earned rise to fame which gave me a bigger appreciation for her talent and dedication. I'm not a fan of her music by any means but I got to give her credit for her hard work. What follows is a truly heart-breaking retelling of how tabloid media started to invade and dominate her life, chipping away at her happiness and sanity. I've always found this kind of celebrity culture intrinsically exploitative, repugnant and misogynistic, especially the constant fixation in american media on female pop stars' purity and virginity. The documentary acknowledges this, yet at the same time I feel like it revels too much in that fact to the point where it becomes exploitative itself.

That overall impression never quite leaves you in the concluding half hour when the documentary delves into some of the details behind the conservatorship, which is seriously shady to say the least. As mildly conspiratorial as the subject appears at first glance the circumstances behind Britney Spears losing legal control over her entire life are genuinely disconcerting and are yet to be fully investigated. After browsing many sources I would definitely consider myself team #Freebritney too, but it's a real shame Framing Britney Spears is so very sparse with actual facts and evidence on that subject. In fact the way a lot of these "activists" are obsessing over and dissecting Britney's life and social media presence doesn't feel that much different from the way Paparazzi and tabloids operate. The concern for her as an actual human being tends to be rather low in both cases. The latter is interested in milking anything for profit, the former in creating publicity for their own social media presence and finding a canvas for projection.

Maybe the activists' work will ultimately prove beneficial for Spears herself, I sincerely hope so, but from the outside looking in it seems like they are mostly indulging in and profiteering from the same celebrity culture they are criticising, and other than the means of exploitation switching to internet platforms not much has changed since the early 2000s. If you look at the current pop stardom, the online dominance of idol culture in Japan and especially South Korea and the unethical way young performers are still being used, you can just tell the only thing keeping us from seing more tell-all documentaries down the line are cleverly placed non-disclosure agreements.

Framing Britney Spears is worth watching at least, but don't expect too much from it. From a media criticism and media analysis standpoint it's difficult to divorce it from everything it is trying to criticise.

Greyhound (2020)

One of the most unremarkable movies I've ever seen

[3/10 · 20 June 2021]

One and a half hours of a bored Tom Hanks shouting orders in front of a bad green screen. That's pretty much it. The acting is virtually non-existent. The music is beyond stock. The special effects would be fine for a lower budgeted movie if the rest of it was in any way entertaining or involving. You basically payed money to watch something that bears an uncanny resemblance to an ad for a WWII-themed browser game and is just about as involving.

It's not so difficult to make a movie about naval warfare exciting. The setting is the main ingredient. Intense paranoia of the invisible foe surrounding our likeable heroes in the quiet moments interrupted by tense, chaotic action where they are put to the test. That's pretty much all you need. Now Greyhound on the other hand took the bold step of droning on endlessly, feeling easily twice its length and wasting all the potential of charisma fountain Tom Hanks who looks like he just wants to sleep.

Maybe we finally did it. After 80 years of cinema on the subject maybe we've finally run out of WWII stories.

This doesn't exist to entertain you, enlighten you or tell a story. First and foremost this movie exists to fill up space on the buffet called Apple TV+, yet another streaming website desperately struggling to find any resemblance of identity. I'm happy people are getting work during the covid pandemic but you never get the feeling anyone involved here was excited to be a part, just glad to be working. You can practically feel the bored crew off-screen occasionally splashing some water on the actors and mostly checking their phones while the robotic charade plays out in front of them.

For all the people excited about the death of cinema and the rise of streaming: take a good look, this is what might await us.