Thứ Hai, 6 tháng 1, 2014

2013: THE YEAR IN MOVIES

I'm not fond of the fashion of eulogising the year-that-was even before it's over, but I also try not to wait nearly a full week to get said eulogy knocked out. But we're here at last, to remember 2013; a year with an appallingly terrible summer season, and an unusually good crop of festival season fare to balance it out. If I do not think that, on balance, the year was anything remotely a good as a lot people have - I can only come up with one movie that seems to have seriously reshaped my ideas of what the medium can achieve, and have accordingly given it my #1 slot - but it has had more than it's share of great-to-almost-wonderful movies in as wide an array of styles and genres as anything in recent memory. I look at my top 10, and I find beautifully-appointed empty-headed populism rubbing shoulders with gorgeous, image-driven genre work; austere non-fiction and madcap horror; musicals, biopics, satire, political commentary, domestic drama.

If 2013 has been light on movies that I expect to hold firm in my personal pantheon, it's been absurdly strong on films that were awfully rewarding and great in the moment, and have lingered in my memory longer than I'd have predicted - months longer, in some cases. Below are the twenty movies that I've been happiest to have encountered, but another ten could be added to that least easily, and without degrading its quality in the slightest.

UPDATE, 1/7/14: I have only recently learned that the amazing Brazilian film Southwest that was my favorite entry at the Chicago International Film Festival in 2011, got an invisible US release in 2013, and was thus eligible for this list. I'm not going to redo everything, but let's just say that it very much would have been on this list, and at a very high number, and would have shut me up about "oh, boohoo, only one transformative film all year". At any rate, watch it if and when you ever possibly can.

(when possible, all links are to my original reviews)

The 10 Best Films of 2013
1. The Act of Killing
2. At Berkeley
3. Gravity
4. The Lords of Salem
5. Before Midnight
6. 12 Years a Slave
7. All Is Lost
8. Inside Llewyn Davis
9. No
10. Mother of George


1. The Act of Killing
(Joshua Oppenheimer et al, Denmark/Norway/UK)

Executive producer Werner Herzog once bemoaned cinema's lack of new images, presenting this as not merely an aesthetic, but a moral crisis. If there's one thing that Oppenheimer's lacerating study of the Indonesian death squads of the mid-'60s is great for, it's the creation of just those images, allowing unrepentant - lionised, even - murderers to indict themselves through the dramatic re-enactments they stage of their own crimes. But it's my pick for the best film of the year precisely because there isn't one thing it's great for, but many: its complex treatment of how watching films and creating films both impact one's ability to live life, its explosive study of a systematic moral crime never punished and largely unknown in other countries, and its examination of how memory and identity interact with each other.


2. At Berkeley
(Frederick Wiseman, USA)

Without editorialising, leading us, or ever announcing his presence, Wiseman has created a great, monumental statement on the current nature of higher education as a philosophical, bureaucratic, and economic player. Four hours is a lot of cinema time, but just a blip compared to a whole year, and yet the sheer variety of locations, events, and concepts presented - from massive rallies to a gardener putting around on a mower - suggest the full scope of how this one institution lives and breathes with something awfully close to definitive authority. It is the year's most glorious parade of human activity.


3. Gravity
(Alfonso Cuarón, USA)

Many of the film's defenders will claim that this is really a deep psychological portrait, and not just the whiz-bang thriller that naysayers describe. It's a warm and rich character study, true, but I take issue with both sides implying that thrill rides are in some way defective or insignificant. In the beginning, movies were only about the exciting impact of a moment-by-moment experience, and nothing in years has been so absurdly terrific at capturing that feeling using all the newest, shiniest toys of contemporary filmmaking. This an exercise in you-are-there thrills all the way, and it's a brilliant one.


4. The Lords of Salem
(Rob Zombie, USA/UK/Canada)

The line between horror and art cinema hasn't been this porous in decades: the greatest of many achievements is to present some of the richest images of the year while also managing to be so insidious and crafty about its horror that it's scarier the second time around than the first. The cherry on top is that it bases itself around one of the most comfortable, casual, lived-in characters in the genre's history. The only film by an important filmmaker this year that's also obviously his career-best; and make no mistake, this one firmly anoints Zombie as an important filmmaker.


5. Before Midnight
(Richard Linklater, USA)

The least film of its trilogy, 'tis true; but when the decade-defining Before Sunrise and Before Sunset are the comparisons, "the least of these" still leaves plenty of room to have the year's very best character study. With or without the context of the first two, it couldn't be any more engrossing: Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke have such an intuitive understanding of who they're playing that "acting" seems less descriptve than something like a godlike act of creating an entire perfect human. My best praise: the instant it was over, I wanted it to be nine years from now.


6. 12 Years a Slave
(Steve McQueen, USA/UK)

The year's most Gravely Important Film has the happy benefit of also being a sweaty, bloody, filthy evocation of history as a living event, populated by thinking, physical men and women just like ourselves. That it's the first truly merciless depiction of American slavery made in America (but not by Americans) is notable; more notable yet is how it backgrounds its social studies tendencies to explore, with visual and narrative grace and nuance, how one man, played by Chiwetel Ejiofor in the most complex performance of 2013, sacrifices and maintains his dignity and identity in the face of hellish cruelty.


7. All Is Lost
(J.C. Chandor, USA)

A sophomore film that feels like the work of a wizened vet with nothing to prove but his effortless mastery; even Robert Redford's amazingly physical, context-free performance as a very specific Everyman is only a facet of the impeccable craft that turns the simplest of concepts into a vigorously tangible thriller anchored in acute human emotion and raw survival instinct alike. There are showier films, but I don't know if any of them comes closer to perfection in more areas of craft and artistry, and the metaphysical ambiguities of the finale have left it my favorite ending of the year.


8. Inside Llewyn Davis
(Joel Coen & Ethan Coen, USA/France)

And look, here are those wizened vets, and here is that effortless mastery. One of the subtlest films the Coens have ever made, it still has the electric dialogue and aggressively vivid characters of all their work, but this time there's a level of reflection and calm that is by no means typical of their work, and it's all the most exciting for it. A snapshot of character and place at a moment that's simultaneously rich in transformative potential and wholly static, it's an odd, moving little journey, bitter and loving in ways that cannot be separated from each other.


9. No
(Pablo Larraín, Chile/France/USA)

A lively, aesthetically punchy reminder that cutting satire and thesis-statement dramas about the media's effect on perception can e, above all else, fun. A crackerjack procedural centered on an exceptionally loose Gael García Bernal, the film is grubby both in its content and its presentation, but Larraín finds several ways to inject a breeziness into even the most sardonic and toxic moments that make a petrifyingly smart movie easy and exciting to watch. Less a history lesson than an exploration and example of how history is constructed, it's a politically astute crowd-pleaser, and how the hell do you do that?


10. Mother of George
(Andrew Dosunmu, USA)

The year's best example of cinema as a living entity: the use of colors and geography and movement within the frame to establish character, emotion, and community connect the film to the best of African cinema, even as the detailed urban realism makes it clear that we're still in the world of American indies. That's a combination that beautifully suits a chamber drama about people trying to select what combination of tradition and the mores of a quickly evolving world work best together. Even better, it might be the most gorgeous film I saw in an outstanding year for cinematography.


Honorable Mentions
Blancanieves
The Bling Ring
Captain Phillips
The Conjuring
Ernest & Célestine
Frozen
A Hijacking
Leviathan
A Touch of Sin
War Witch


Best Unreleased in the U.S. with no immediate hopes to the contrary
Heli


Bottom Ten

10. Carrie (Kimberly Peirce)
An on-paper sublime marriage of director and content, but the execution could not possibly be less inspired or full of contempt for itself with existing. A dully literal take on material that is, to its very bones, abstract and poetic.


9. Texas Chainsaw 3D (John Luessenhop)
Amateur-hour gore, bargain-basement 3-D, and those are the good points of a movie that has a shitty script with flat characters behaving illogically even by slasher standards. The climax is such a calculated insult to the very notion of the franchise, I'm a little stunned the filmmakers have been strung up by the fandom.


8. The Canyons (Paul Schrader)
Exploitative trash starring the most famous-burned out former child star of the century is one thing. Specifically, it's the thing that The Canyons is not, and would be much improved by becoming. Instead, this is a stultifying crime story in which both explicit nudity and thriller mechanics are bent into something dull and pointless in service to dime store commentary on the movie business.


7. Free Birds (Jimmy Hayward)
There's always that one children's movie every year that openly acknowledges that it hates all children (actually, there's usually five or six), but even by those standards, this is an ill-plotted, crudely anachronistic exercise in shrieking dumb comedy and ugly character animation, the very definition of soulless commercialism.


6. Only God Forgives (Nicolas Winding Refn)
Some of the most gorgeous cinematography of the year, in service to a grinding, redundant tale of blood begetting blood, which substitutes a specifically sleepy and uninspired kind of nihilism for anything more interesting or insightful. Five minutes could have been revelatory, 90 are soporific and deadning, and only Kristin Scott Thomas is campy enough to be watchable.


5. Scary Movie 5 (Malcolm D. Lee)
By the barest margin the more tolerable of the year's two awful, awful Paranormal Activity parodies. But that's sort of like picking the prettiest pustule on your ass. It's still an endless dribble of pop culture re-enactments that don't even bother to have the structure of gags, relying almost solely on excrement and penises to magically convert, "Hey, this was a movie" into, "Hey, this was a moDICKS ARE FUNNY!"


4. A Haunted House (Michael Tiddes)
At least it feels like it has some intention behind it, instead of just arbitrary references, but it's still a long slog to get from one marginally funny gag to another in a field of sex, fart, and sexy fart scenes. Also, while dicks are funny, apparently anal rape is HILARIOUS, because ew, ha ha, butt sex.


3. Identity Thief (Seth Gordon)
Undisguised, unmodulated nastiness, masquerading as a comedy because one of the leads is a fat fatty. The jokes are obvious and undersold, the whole thing is achingly long, the leads are having a visibly wretched time, and it's all chasing the lowest common denominator so earnestly that "pandering" seems wildly insufficient.


2. Insidious: Chapter 2 (James Wan)
The director of one of the year's best ghost stories also managed to shit out the absolute worst ghost story since his own Dead Silence six years ago. Characters we have no interest in go through tediously arbitrary hoops on the way to insulting, tone-deaf Shocking Reveals while a pronounced lack of spooky atmosphere shrivels up and dies on screen. It is, apparently, actually that hard to engineer even a decent lazy "boo!" scare.


1. Movie 43 (Omnibus)
An all-star cast gathers together for made-in-the-backyard quality sketches predicated on dubious, one-not scatalogical concepts. "Man with testicles on his neck gets food on them" is among the wittier highlights. Maybe Lubitsch could have made something out of this with Carole Lombard, or something, but I guess we'll just never know.


Best Surprise
Antiviral
David Cronenberg's son makes his debut with a body horror movie. I defy you to find anything in that construction that indicates more than a lazily acceptable exercise in giving us what we already know is coming. But Brandon Cronenberg had bigger things on his mind than copying Dad, and the start of what I hope to be a full and vibrant career is an astoundingly unique depiction of the intersection between body and economy, with some of the most convincing design and cinematography of any "fucked up future" movie of recent vintage.


Biggest Disappointment
To the Wonder
Many years from now I expect to rewatch it, and not understand what I found so heartbreaking about it. Many years from now. It's every inch a Terrence Malick film, and Emmanuel Lubezki, at any rate, is on his best behavior. But it's so much shaggier and less shapely than any other film in the director's career, and the things that interested him the most aren't as compelling as the things he only alludes to in passing. It's surely not fair to expect two The Tree of Lifes in a row, but...well, I did.


Best Popcorn Movie
Machete Kills
A vigorous, screw-everybody exaggeration of every tendency in Robert Rodriguez's entire career, an attempt to make a live-action cartoon saturated with idiotic violence, and a parody of the very concept of sequels. I get that it was broadly hated, but after the second time I saw it in theaters, I had fully stopped letting that fact bother me. It was far more stupid fun than all the grim CGI-heavy exercises in being epic and mournful that tried to call themselves "action movies" over the summer, I can damn well tell you.


Film That Will Least Deserve My Positive Review a Decade Hence
Blackfish
Advocacy documentaries are the absolute hardest thing to talk about, because they're more about having a polemical point than an artistic one. But God, this film really doesn't have anything going on cinematically. And the further I get, the harder it is for me to tell what it was primarily advocating: that orcas shouldn't be held in captivity? That zoos need better safety controls for their employees? That orcas are smart enough to become psychotic killers? At least two of which are noble and necessary claims, but ones that could better be made in a passionate essay, maybe.


Film That Will Deserve My Positive Review a Decade Hence, But Less Ebullient of a Positive Review
Blue Is the Warmest Color
Mine and everybody's. And sure, it's a good movie and will always be a good movie; but I haven't cooled this fast on anything since I was a wide-eyed film student prone to having intense reactions that I regretted a week later. The more I let it simmer, the more that the running time feels like an atrocious indulgence and the more that the sex scenes reveal themselves as an obvious mistake, and as good as the actors are, they're doing a lot more heavy lifting than they should have to in the second half.


Film That Least Deserved My Positive Even Before I Published It
Man of Steel
As clear an example of "I really wanted to like this, and so I kept saying positive things at the movie until I vaguely believed them but not really" as can be found in all the annals of this blog.


Film That Will Least Deserve My Negative Review a Decade Hence
The Croods
Generic plotting with generic performances of generically-written characters, but you know what's not generic? The design of the thing, which seems a lot more impressive after the most enthusiastically bland year for American studio animation in a lot of years. Somewhat grotesque characters, eye-popping colors slathered over fantasy landscapes; it looks like nothing else, and that perhaps counts for more than I gave it credit.


Film I'm Most Eager to Re-Visit
White House Down
It seemed like a particularly mechanical Roland Emmerich Quips and A-Splosions device at the time, but a couple people who definitely know from bad cinema have come to its defense in a way that makes me at least curious to see if I missed anything. I doubt very much that I did, but I'd anyway like to come around to thinking that it's better than Olympus Has Fallen.


Best Moment
I feel like I'm being played by the Walt Disney Company if I say "Let it Go" from Frozen, because as gorgeously bombastic as the song and performance are, and as wonderfully as the choreography advances narrative and character through the mechanism of the song, it's too fucking easy. And the dirty little secret is that the song really doesn't serve the purpose in the film's plot that it pretends to, and for all its impact is kind of a red herring. But...



"Let it Go" from Frozen it is.

Bonus points: "My soul is spiraling in frozen fractals all around" is my favorite individual line from any Disney song since Howard Ashman died.


Worst Moment
When, in the already dodgy late-period Dario Argento film Dracula 3D, the cruelest and most powerful of all vampires transforms into a giant praying mantis, brought to life by the absolute worst CGI you could imagine from any film that didn't premiere on an Asylum DVD. I'd compare it to having a 1990s first-person shooter suddenly invade a vampire movie; but who wants to insult video games like that?


Best Cameo
Joe Don Baker in Mud, the living embodiment of Southern Good Ol' Boy authoritah sublimely positioned as everything hidebound and totalitarian and morally self-righteous in the rough and tumble rural world where the story takes place.


Worst Cameo
Brad Pitt in 12 Years a Slave, by far the most distracting movie star moment in a film that really needed to rethink some of its casting choices (Paul Giamatti, the slaver? Hm...). The worst part isn't Pitt's from-nowhere-resembling-Canada accent, though that is wretched, nor how obviously the whole thing was for the marketing, but that the film's producer just happened to be appearing as the One Decent White Man who single-handedly retrieves the protagonist's freedom for him.


Best Line
"To be clear, asshole, you fucking asshole, I want very much to have it if it's Jim's. That's what I want. But since I don't know, you not only fucked things up by fucking me, and maybe making me pregnant, but even if it's not yours, I can't know that, so I have to get rid of what might be a perfectly fine baby, a baby I want, because everything you touch turns to shit! Like King Midas's idiot brother."
-Jean (Carey Mulligan), Inside Llewyn Davis. Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen.


Worst Line
“It’s been so long since I felt real pain! I missed it, but not as much as I miss inflicting it on others”.
-Josh Lambert (Patrick Wilson), as possessed by Parker Crane, Insidious: Chapter 2. Written by Leigh Whannell.


Best Poster
Gravity, IMAX

The shining moment of one of the year's single finest ad campaigns. What is the film about? The terror of being stuck in the vast emptiness of outer space. How do we visually depict that? With little imagination but profound success, in this case. It was positioned right outside the men's restroom in my theater of choice for a couple of months, and I swear, every time I had to pee, it was a brand new sucker punch right to the gut.


Best Teaser Poster
Godzilla, Comic-Con Teaser

The platonic ideal of a popcorn movie teaser. Do you know what the title refers to? Of course you do, he's the Mickey Mouse of giant monsters. Do you want to see what he looks like? Too damn bad, but but based on the scale and detail, he is going to look all kinds of damn awesome.


Best Poster That Was Ineligible, Because I Already Talked About It Last Year, But Let's Just Look At It Again
The Wolverine, Teaser


Ahhhh.


Worst Poster
The Counselor, One-sheet

I sincerely do not understand what's going on here. The arbitrary faces, that's just standard operating procedure. The horrible imbalance of colors, that's regrettable, but shit happens. The fact that they're linear strips instead of floating heads is... different? But if you're going to go that way, put any effort into the cropping on those strips. I mean, what the fuck is going on with Michael Fassbender? Or the hideous Bardem/Pitt Janus head. It's not only a terrible idea, it's the worst possible execution of that idea.


Best Trailer
Man of Steel Trailer 3



We have all rehashed the agony of finding out that the awe-inspiring sense of weight and scope, and the promise of truly magical, epic supeheroics, underpinned by a Hans Zimmer score that crawls up and down your spine, was instead bland, moody, and tiresome. But honestly, doesn't knowing what Man of Steel turned out to be make the trailer even more impressive? They had that, and they figured out a way to cut this. That is the some hard core editing mojo, that is.


Worst Trailer
Frozen, Teaser



It's easy to pick on it now that we all know better, but this was surely the most discouraging 90 seconds I saw in a movie theater all year. Infantile slapstick and viscerally unlikable characters (who'd turn out to be far more pleasant in the movie) clearly being pitched at the very worst kind of child aren't really promising to anybody but those children. And since it so obviously worked for Disney, to the tune of $300 million and counting, I suppose we'll see these awful little nightmares of craven pandering every couple of years.


Best Title
Only God Forgives


Best Nonsensical Title
Ain't Them Bodies Saints


Worst Title
Star Trek Into Darkness


Title That Needs the Least Modification for the Eventual Porn Parody
Inside Llewyn Davis


Worst Title That Is Completely Justified by the Source Material and the Film's Content, But Still, Really?
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug


Most Fancy-Ass La-di-da Monocle-Wearing Pretentious Title for a Movie That Could Not Have Earned It Less
Insidious: Chapter 2


The Ten Best Classic Films I Saw for the First Time in 2013
It was such a red-letter year for me in terms of playing catch-up with older movies that I couldn't limit myself to just one, like I usually do. Instead, here's a chronological list of the ten best movies that I only saw for the first time in the last twelve months. Some of these are more embarrassing than others, but better late than never, as the fella said.

The Golem: How He Came Into the World (Wegener & Boese, 1920)
Seven Years Bad Luck (Linder, 1921)
The Goddess (Wu, 1934)
Olympia (Riefenstahl, 1938) - both parts
In a Lonely Place (Ray, 1950)
Journey to Italy (Rossellini, 1954)
The Big Combo (Lewis, 1955)
Woman in the Dunes (Teshigahara, 1964)
Dellamorte Dellamore (Soavi, 1994)
Pola X (Carax, 1999)

Chủ Nhật, 5 tháng 1, 2014

REVIEW ALL MONSTERS! - THE DESOLATION OF SMOG

We can have pussyfoot around, or we can be frank: Godzilla vs. Hedorah, from 1971, is the god-damn weirdest of all Godzilla films, and it puts in a superlative argument for being the god-damn weirdest giant monster movie that Toho ever put its name to. This is a truth largely unrelated to judgments of good and bad - Godzilla vs. Hedorah essentially transcends such judgments, anyway.

It was the first and only Godzilla film directed by of Banno Yoshimitsu, who also co-wrote the story with Kimura Takeshi; the story goes that a hospital-ridden Tanaka Tomoyuki (the series' longtime producer) didn't have a chance to see any of the production until the film was complete, at which point he was so aghast at what Banno had done with the material that he basically interceded to destroy the man's career. A drastic step, and not, I would argue, merited by the film (even in at its most garishly stupid, it's a better movie than the bulk of Fukuda Jun's kiddie Godzilla flicks). But it's easy to understand why the Toho executive would be so horrified by what Banna created. This is peculiar and impossible to categorise at ever level: it's the most horror-driven Godzilla film since the very first Godzilla, 17 years prior, but it's also as baldly eager to court children as the literal kid's fantasy All Monsters Attack in 1969. It has random animated interludes that suggest Ralph Bakshi doing PSAs about pollution for Sesame Street, and random musical interludes in which one of the male leads hallucinates that everybody at a '60s style dance party has fish for heads (actually, these two points aren't all that incompatible). It opens with a James Bond-style credits sequence; its third act kicks in when a bunch of hippies try to hold a peace-in at the base of Mount Fuji to stop a building-size monster made of the living spirit of industrial pollution.

It is, in fact, almost giddily anxious to make no sense as a coherent whole, and while this is what makes it so irresistible to its vocal fanbase (of whom I number - it's easily my favorite of the '70s Godzilla films), it's also what makes it uncommercial and alienating and, by most useful definitions of the word, "bad". Certainly, there is no other Godzilla film where sequences that work like gangbusters and sequences that die onscreen pile up in such equal measure. Most of those sequences which die - though not all of them! - center around the barely-defined human plot, which I'd synopsise as "Suburban family is doing this and then GODZILLA FIGHTING HEDORAH". Storytelling is not, let's say, Godzilla vs. Hedorah's strong suit.

But the human half of the equation, is, anyway centered on the Yano family: Dr. Yano Toru (Yamauchi Akira), an all-purpose B-movie scientist who is first to discover the existence of some kind of pollution-spawned tadpole-like creature that can secrete acid, and grows like a motherfucker as it joins with other beings like it; his wife Toshie (Kimura Toshie), and their son Ken (Kawase Hiroyuke), whose name should be our first clue of how unbelievably close he is to be the perfect Kenny (a character type named for the patron saint of them all, from the English dub of Daiei's 1965 Gamera): the precocious little shitbox kid who goes about explaining how this big monster is the wonderful friend of humanity (in this case, equating Godzilla directly with Superman), while having an inexplicable presence in the story and impact on its development. This particular Ken is responsible for giving Hedorah its name, among other things (if I understand it right, it means something akin to "Sludgezilla"), none of which involve drama, conflict, or narrative in the conventional meanings of those words. The Yanos are friends - or something - with twentysomething Keuchi Yukio (Shiba Toshio) and his girlfriend Fujiyama Miki (Mari Keiko), who have even less of a reason to be involved in the movie than awful little Ken does, with Yukio serving primarily to motivate both the trippy club scene and the Fuji love-in, the two strangest individual elements in a film bursting at the seams with them.

That being said, most of the strangeness centers around the film's inexplicable pop-culture wobbliness, which must be situated in some kind of specifically Japanese marriage of the '60s and the '70s that I simply can't fathom. There are elements of the design in the more hippiefied moments that feel every bit of ten years out of date, but the score by Manabe Riichirō (who did come back for another Godzilla film, though he was ne less responsible for the film's uncharacteristic feeling than Banno) has a kind of tuneless, brassy funk to it - the main Godzilla theme is a pseudocomic braying - that looks forward as much as it looks back, though mostly it's looking to the side at some place that I can't imagine. There's even a touch of period drag to the way that the whole thing, viewed from the right angle, feels like a very earnest Family Message Picture of a kind that the '70s perfected, teaching us about ecology and industrial waste in a way that could not feel more bound to the early '70s, the only time that this topic was fresh and new enough to justify the lecturing that happens in the movie, but established enough to serve as the backbone for what was, after all, a shlocky B-picture.

And there's the tonal shifting, which I've alluded to, but let's really dig into it: Godzilla vs. Hedorah is an absolutely bizarre mixture of tones. When I call it the most horrifying Godzilla film since 1954, I'm only being accurate: it shows melted human skeletons surrounded by ragged clothes, and the scarring effects of Hedorah's acid are depicted with nary a trace of restraint or consideration For The Children. Yet it also has a pronounced vein of sly humor, sometimes even intersecting with the horror; in one sequence, Hedorah's attack leaves a mewling kitten coated in toxic goo, a shot that manages to be shocking and disturbing and goofy and absurd in one tight package. And this is, famously, the film where Godzilla uses his radioactive fire breath as a jet engine to fly through the air, quite possibly the dumbest - and most awesomely dumb - sight in any Godzilla film ever made. Banno has claimed that this was an attempt to lighten the mood after so much bleakness in the film, and it certainly does that, though I am not convinced it does it gracefully or well. It is, however, one of the most vivid memories I have of even my earliest viewing of the film (this was, in fact, my first Godzilla picture, eons ago), and I suspect I'm not alone in that. Minimally, it's not something you can get anywhere else, and the go-for-broke lack of giving a fuck is amazing even as it's terrible and stupid.

And Banno was right that the film had been pretty grim up to that point: the fighting between Godzilla and Hedorah is both some of the longest and most brutal in any of the Godzilla vs... films. Partially because of Hedorah itself, one of the most peculiar daikaiju in any Toho film (the effects were directed by Nakano Teruyoshi, an assistant of the late Tsuburaya Eiji being promoted for this and the remaining '70s Godzilla pictures), taking as it does four different forms - one of them a flying saucer made of sludge with glowing eyes! - but also, thanks to the pitch-black sets where most of the action is staged, one of the most impeccably creepy. It's a seriously junky looking combination of rags and plastic eyes, but light those eyes up and have them the only visible illumination in a black screen, and the thing is terrifying (the suit performance by kaiju first-timer Nakayama Kengo is pretty fantastic as well).

Moreover, the staging of the battles are among the most unique in this era of Godzilla films. There's not any of the wrestling moves that had entered the series, and no animal brutality: watching Godzilla and Hedorah studying each other in the slow lead-up to each fight is like watching a chess match as much as it is an action setpiece. This is the most cunning and thoughtful and human-like we've ever seen Godzilla or any of his opponents act, which has its good and bad points: the bad is that he feels very little like Godzilla (the inexplicable way that he simply appears from nowhere in the movie to do battle, officially turning into a pro-humanity superhero with this entry, also feels very little like Godzilla), but the good is that the fights are among the most subtle and inventive that he was ever involved with. The Destroy All Monsters suit, now making its third appearance, was beginning to look pretty shabby, but Nakajima Haruo invests it with enough personality that Godzilla still feels more like a character than a rubber prop.

All of the good, and all of the bizarreness, are certainly enough for me to remain captivated by the film even when it is frustratingly random and arbitrary, and this happens often. Godzilla vs. Hedorah is an unabashed mess, but it is the most giddy, exciting kind of all, and while I imagine that it's total uniqueness within the Godzilla canon is as much a turn-off to some as it is a turn-on to others, I treasure every moment of this strange horror-comedy-cartoon attempt to rejuvenate an increasingly formulaic genre.

Thứ Bảy, 4 tháng 1, 2014

MOVIES I MISSED IN 2013: LOVE IS ALL YOU NEED


Some titles are just destined to be used ironically, and Paradise: Love is their king. Particularly being from Austria, a country with a fetish for cinematic misery. And particularly, I understand, from the mind of director Ulrich Seidl, who I gather (I have not previously seen his work) is kind of like a version of Michael Haneke without the formal playfulness to leaven his depictions of awful people suffering.

Sure enough, the film's bitter, travesty of the qualities presented in its title is made clear early on and repeated vigorously throughout. Paradise is here played by a beach resort in sub-Saharan Africa, where middle-aged European women and young African men engage in a corroded kind of pas de deux over sex and money, and love refers to the way that one particular woman, Teresa (Margarete Tiesel), is able to convince herself that the various gigolos she encounters during her vacation care about her on any kind of vaguely emotional level, and that she cares about them in the same way.

That's basically it, as far as narrative content goes: an early scene back in Austria sets up Teresa's vacation while introducing us to her sister (Maria Hofstätter) and teenage daughter (Melanie Lenz) , the subjects of the other other two legs of Seidl's Paradise trilogy, Faith and Hope. Everything else is a series of largely repetitive scenes of Teresa navigating the treacherous emotional terrain of a sex tourism trip that she might very well have misunderstood until she got there - both the screenplay (by Seidl and Veronika Franz) and Tiesel's immaculately subtle performance leave it very much up for debate how much Teresa actually knows about what's going on and when she knows it. The conflict in this largely anecdotal story, barely even plotty enough to call itself "episodic", is not between Teresa and anyone else, but within Teresa: to what degree is she actually looking for love in the strangest of places, and to what degree is this just her elaborate game of self-deception that allows her to continue feeling like a moral person in the midst of this whoredom parade?

This is positively aching to be presented in the bleakest possible way, the sort of film that we endure rather than watch. To its credit, Love is not nearly as punishing as it could be, for it largely stays away from being particularly cruel to Teresa. She suffers no humiliations to speak of, though it could be easily argued that the grossly transfixed detail with which Seidl and cinematographers Ed Lachman and Wolfgang Thaler depict Tiesel's sagging and overweight naked body is in and of itself all the humiliation the film needs (this is not a movie with a particularly forgiving or positive attitude towards the sexual desires of aging women). There's no punishment for her transgression of lying to herself and others about her emotional and sexual needs, except that she ends up unfulfilled in both of them.

It shouldn't be assumed that since Love keeps Tiesel from the abuse that perhaps Haneke or definitely Lars von Trier would have heaped on her, it's somehow a more pleasant movie than the grubbiest of Euro-art "everything sucks and people most of all" pictures. Love presents a singularly black portrait of how people engage with each other, using its blandly documentarylike long-takes and wide shots to watch its characters like zoo animals. The comparison is not flattering to the animals. In Love, human behavior reduces basically and always to one point: tell me what lie I should use to get what I want out of you. It's impossible to reduce it to simple parable of disgusting Europeans literally fucking over poor Africans, because the Africans are just as predatory and merciless as the other side. Nobody seems honorable or worthy in this scenario, because every one is actively and consciously reducing everyone else to cogs in a game of humanity-as-economics, and Teresa is the worst of all since she seems to believe - at the very least, she broadcasts it to everyone else - that by framing her behavior in this system as part of an emotional journey and desire for connection, she excuses herself from the nonstop cycle of mutual exploitation.

"Dear God, then why bother?" is a very legitimate question here. Because the issues are real, and under-explored in the movies, or at least under-explored with such non-sensationalist intellectualism, is one answer. Because Tiesel gives one of the year's great performances in creating a woman of murky inner depths, as murky to her as to anybody watching the film, is another. But in honesty, Paradise: Love is a film that I'm dubious enough on for myself that I can't really claim that it's necessary or rewarding cinema. It's a mean movie in some unfortunate ways: from the very first shot of people with Down syndrome being battered about in bumper cars at the attraction Teresa runs, Seidl shows a disreputable fascination with weird body shapes that only worsens once the panoply of nude scenes focused on Tiesel's conventionally unattractive body starts up. I wouldn't say it's pedantic and moralising in the way that his countryman Haneke can easily become in his worst moments, but the film feels at times like it's standing in judgment, even when it's not really standing in judgment of anything in particular.

At any rate, it's a real sock in the gut, though I think if Seidl's impulse to tell the Paradise films in one two-hour omnibus rather than as three separate features had held steady, it would lose none of its impact and gained some sense of focus. In its current state, it's a bit redundant, and Tiesel's fluid performance and our shifting sense of who her character is only carries it so far. But there are moments in the film, both character-based and not - there are long shots where Siedel seems to grow weary of sufferingy and instead allows himself a chance to simply watch human beings in the act of getting by with life - that linger on in the mind as sharp pieces of observation that rise above any simple moral argument, and give the film more nuance than just another damn story of depravity. At any rate, it's a film that, once watched, is not readily un-watched, in both good and dismaying ways alike.

7/10

MOVIES I MISSED IN 2013: AND HE'S DANCING LIKE HE NEVER DANCED BEFORE

It would be nice if more remakes found some way to justify themselves beyond "because of the money" - it would be nice, in fact, if more movies generally did the same - and this goes doubly for films that are basically flawless. Which is a phrase I feel super uncomfortable in applying to 1980's Maniac, the spetacularly notorious calling card of cult director William Lustig, because in some ways it's miserable, and in many ways it's amateurish, but I don't think you could possibly deny that it is the best possible version of what it wants to be. Namely, a brutally, unforgivingly intimate stay in the mind of a sexually neurotic serial killer, not at all unlike the ones starting to crop up in every cheap horror film in 1980, with one huge difference: while Jason Voorhees and his legions of imitators are psychological and dramatic junk food, Maniac's Frank Zito is petrifyingly plausible, and the film built around him isn't exploiting the real world horrors of violent death, but in a very sickening and inescapable way, explaining them.

We can quibble over the question of whether the experience of Maniac is something that anybody ever ought to submit themselves to, but let's skip to the punchline: any remake that even begins to justify itself needs to find some way to at least approach the original's effect of trapping us in the brain of a person who we'd very much like not to be trapped inside, or it might as well not even bother. And sure enough, the remake of Maniac that now exists is absolutely hellbent on not just matching but exploding its predecessor's skill at marrying our perspective to that of the psychopath in question. One would expect no less of a film produced and co-written by New French Extreme icon Alexandre Aja (director or not, the film has a lot of his fingerprints on it; the actual director, doing a good job of it, is Franck Khalfoun), a man with an intense passion for making sure that violence is treated with unblinking gravity and care, but even then, it's hard to predict the, as it were, literalism with which the film picks up the mantle of its forebear in making us feel like we're in Frank's head. Maniac '12, in point of fact, is shot almost exclusively from Frank's point of view as he goes about stabbing and scalping women in a glossy, unnamed city played by Los Angeles (the originally was specifically, and even vitally, located in New York).

It's a gimmick, of course. First-person movies are always gimmicks, even the very best (which is, by leagues and leagues, Russian Ark). I will claim for Maniac the merit that it is an awfully well-mounted one (none of the wobbly gimcrackery of something like Lady in the Lake here!), with star Elijah Wood and cinematographer Maxime Alexandre collaborating in the most staggeringly complicated ways to make a vivid and fleshed-out character out of camera movements and occasional glimpses of Wood's hands. Mechanically, it's the kind of thing that seems unbelievable in the moment, only to get more unbelievable as you think about it. Aesthetically, it's a gimmick, one that never stops being distracting.

Mind you, it's a gimmick that gets the point across. It also permits a singularly fantastic moment in the middle of the film, when for a brief time during a murder, the camera does shift back to show Frank's entire body, the best job that I have ever seen any film do of suggesting the high that serial killers are said to feel in the act of killing. So in general, one must credit Maniac with making its point emphatically. We are thrust in the position of lingering over the things Frank lingers over, and understanding the urgency he feels in needing to kill and also the disgust he feels with himself. Much as is the case in the original film, there's very little sense of any of this being presented as "cool" in the way of the standard generic slasher or splatter film. The first death scene happens so suddenly, before we've gotten a chance to find our footing with the film, that it shocks one into a sense of dazed confusion that carries over to the first of the film's intensely graphic and persuasive scalpings; a later scalping is presented with the victim screaming hysterically in a way that makes it the most legitimately upsetting and alienating death scene I've seen in a horror movie in a very long time.

This is all the opposite of gore pornography: it is uncomfortable and distressing, though never as much as the original Maniac, which I'd credit to the first film having such grungy, hellish cinematography along with the unsparing murders, while the new film is a good deal cleaner and crisper. Obviously, it's not an easy film to recommend: there's absolutely no uplift or entertainment, only a lot of pummeling, and the film's ultimate message, like the original, is that this kind of thing happens and it is an absolute perversion that it does, but as humans we need to confront this kind of grotesque reality. Everything about the film build to this point brilliantly: the degree to which Wood has permitted himself to devolve into schlubbery for the few shots he appears in (the ratty-ass goatee in particularly is a wonderfully queasy touch), the jagged electronic score by Rob (the professional name of Robin Coudert), which adds a layer of distorted anti-humanity to the proceedings, unworldly and distancing even more than the animalistic kabuki of Wood's performance.

It is, all told, a potent and thoroughly effective reworking of the original film for new audiences and new concerns, though my question remains the same as with the version: is it valuable? I have seen each Maniac once and am very satisfied to have done so, though I have no intention of seeing either one a second time. They're bleak movies that rub our faces in the worst things that can happen in an stable, violent mind, confronting us with bloodlust and misogyny and depravity in a most direct and inescapable way, and this is not an unworthy thing, insofar as it can't help but produce a profound effect on the viewer. And certainly, art has a responsibility to make us aware of the ugliest and darkest as much as anything else, and the new Maniac achieves that goal gloriously. But it's just not the kind of thing you "like", and not the kind of thing you want to suggest that anybody watches at any time, for any reason, even if it's pretty nauseatingly powerful.

7/10

Thứ Năm, 2 tháng 1, 2014

REVIEW ALL MONSTERS! - KILLER KRABS FROM OUTER SPACE

Through no fault of its own, Space Amoeba - initially released in English as Yog, Monster from Space, and given the brisk Japanese title Gezora · Ganime · Kameba: Decisive Battle! Giant Monsters of the South Seas - has the feeling of a great, epoch-marking film. It was the first Toho daikaiju eiga released in the 1970s, coming out in August of 1970; that also happens to make it the first one made after the death of Tsuburaya Eiji, the great visual effects director who hadn't taken too active a role on most of the company's tokusatsu in several years, but was nevertheless a spiritual guide on many of them. It was the last Toho daikaiju eiga until the 1990s that didn't feature Godzilla in any capacity (and its monsters were never introduced into any later Godzilla vehicle); it was the last film directed by the great Honda Ishirō for several years, as he turned his attention to television.

It is also really not a movie that you want to hang the onus of words like "first" and "last" on, because that makes it seem like it ought to be bigger, somehow, than just a daft alien invasion B-picture. Even if it is a spectacularly daft version of that genre, built on plot tropes that feel like they couldn't possibly still be getting a completely serious workout anywhere in the world as late as 1970. And yet, here they are: the mysterious Something that sends a human space probe crashing back to Earth, alien mind control of a human to act as the invaders' mouthpiece, a plucky photographer there to save the day, distrusting islanders, a sparkly blue space creature that turns cuttlefish into giant monsters...

I mentioned it was daft, right? You really can't overwork that word in this case: yes, the invaders, taking the form of an amorphous entity that can meld with Earth organisms - it might as well be called a "space amoeba", in the absence of a more accurate name - plan to take over the world with a building-size cuttlefish, crab, and turtle, operating from the remote Selga Island. But not so remote that a major corporation called Asian Development Company isn't planning on turning it into a new resort spot, and that's why photographer Kudo (Kubo Akira) is on the island, along with a cluster of fellow Asian Development toilers including biologist Mida Kyoichi (Tsuchiya Yoshio), embedded industrial spy Obata (Sahara Kenji), and pretty girl with no obvious job Ayako (Takahashi Atsuko). When their arrival is accompanied by the giant cuttlefish - the myth-savvy Dr. Mida identifies it as Gezora, a creature out of legend - the local islanders immediately view the Japanese intruders with fear and contempt, and that leaves the expedition with no help as they're forced to fight off the giant beast, and those which follow it, two giant crabs called Ganimes and the spiny turtle Kamoebas.

The primary feeling one gets from Space Amoeba is fatigue. Never before had Honda's direction been so slack and trite as it is here; he even indulges in that laziest trick of late-'60s and early-'70s cinema, the crash zoom. Screenwriter Ogawa Ei, writing his only daikaiju eiga, relies upon the blandest possible protagonists in the most nondescript of settings (anything interesting to be done with a South Pacific setting for a monster film had been spent by the end of Ebirah, Horror of the Deep, four years prior).Only Obata has any kind of interesting arc, though the actors certainly try their very best to put some energy and fun into the proceedings. They are given absolutely nothing to work with: that the film represents the third Toho film in a half decade to rely on "alien mind control of daikaiju" is entirely emblematic of the level of creativity on display. Even Ifukube Akira, whose scores could usually be relied upon for some measure of mood-setting and energy, is strictly on autopilot here.

Still, the overall experience is rather more fascinatingly weird than dispiritingly tired, and that owes almost everything to the three big monsters (or four - there are two Ganimes, but they're played by the same suit), created by the luckless Arikawa Sadamasa, who was absolutely never going to be a great replacement for Tsuburaya, but did his level best at working with fewer resources to create something distinctive, if not entirely great. Certainly, Gezora is one of the most vividly suit-ish suits Toho ever put onscreen, its mass of shaky tentacles failing entirely to hide Nakajima Haruo's legs (there are two of what I can only describe as tentacle boots coming straight down from the creature), and the whole thing looking very much like a plush toy. But damned if it isn't eye-catching, and thoroughly unlike anything you're apt to have seen anywhere else. Ganimes is a far more effective giant crustacean than Ebirah ever dreamed of being, and Kamoebas - ah, now Kamoebas is a monster! A vicious, reptilian at the end of a freakishly phallic head, covered in spikes, he's genuinely threatening in a way that no new kaiju had been since King Ghidorah, though it must be confessed that the shape of the suit made it inflexible to a degree that the big action moments have to be implied rather than shown.

Memorable kaiju across the board, then, if not for exclusively positive reasons. It helps the film out considerably, therefore, that they're so present, occupying a surprisingly huge percentage of the running time. Perhaps this is because Honda recognised that nothing else in the film was terribly interesting, and there needed to be something to keep it moving; certainly the monsters are only a distraction from the thin characters and arbitrary plotting, and not a real fix. Still, better a kaiju film with great monsters and lousy everything else than one with lousy monsters on top of nothing else being very interesting, as the previous year's All Monsters Attack teaches us; Space Amoeba is a pretty limp, banal affair overall, but when it works, it's pretty energetic fun at the most basic level of the genre. And it works considerably more often than its overall tepid construction seems like it should permit.

Thứ Tư, 1 tháng 1, 2014

REVIEW ALL MONSTERS! - GO-GO-GODZILLA FIRES RADIOACTIVITY!

The consensus of Godzilla fandom is that All Monsters Attack (originally released in English as Godzilla's Revenge, an even less accurate title for this movie in there is virtually no revenge and only a small number of monsters attack) is made of pure evil. And this is not a difficult opinion to understand, because if there's one thing that All Monsters Attack completely sucks at, it's being a halfway decent Godzilla movie.

But I will confess to a grievous fault, which is that I don't know that I can hate it with as much fury and blood rage as I'm supposed to. Take a long look at the context of the film; consider what it is trying to be and not what we might wish it to be; it's still a crappy movie, but only a crappy movie, and by no means the crappiest. It's a damn sight better than Son of Godzilla, that's for sure.

This was the first film made after Destroy All Monsters was meant to have finished off the franchise in 1968, but succeeded instead in revitalising it. What we must remember is that the underlying problem was still there: Destoy All Monsters might have well been a hit, but the Godzilla films had been treading water for a while and Toho was still unwilling to throw a great deal of money at an uncertain series. This means two things: one is that All Monsters Attack, in a mercenary cost-cutting move, uses a massive quantity of stock footage to bring live to its giant monsters, so it's almost completely useless as a daikaiju action-adventure. The other is that even more than Son of Godzilla, All Monsters Attack was pitched at a juvenile audience, presumably because that was the only population likely to be sufficiently forgiving of giant rubber monsters in any possible form to stand still for the parsimony of this recycled, sleepy effort.

Committing to making a children's movie, right on the heels of Destroy All Monsters, was decisive and fatal. One must respect the ingenuity with which producer Tanaka Tomoyuki, writer Sekizawa Shinichi, and director Honda Ishirō (his last Godzilla film for many years) solved their many problems, without necessarily having much use for the dodgy results of those labors. All Monsters Attack takes the form of a children's fable, in which Very Special Lessons Are Taught, which is wildly unlike Sekizawa's more characteristic flights of nonsense, so I presume on no evidence that this was Honda's doing. Little Ichiro (Yazaki Tomonori) is a latchkey kid in an unnamed Japanese suburb, barely noticed by his parents (Sahara Kenji and Naka Machiko), and largely friendless. He is frequently humiliated by a bully named Sancho (Ito Junichi), whom Ichiro has privately nicknamed Gabara, and he spends all possible time at the workshop of a toy designer named Inami Shinpei (Amamoto Hideyo, uncomfortably playing a kindly man after a career of villains). The other thing Ichiro does is fantasise about the monsters of Monster Island, and one lonely night at home, he pretends to have a supercomputer transport him to that exotic, wonderful locale.

In his fantasies and dreams, Ichiro pals around with the Son of Godzilla himself, Minilla, now boy-sized and capable of speaking (the player in the suit is, as before, dwarf actor Machan, his voice provided by Uchiyama Midori). Minilla turns out to have bully problems himself: a big monster named - get this! - Gabara is tormenting him, and the stern Godzilla refuses to help, but instead watches from the sidelines over in Ebirah, Horror of the Deep. For Godzilla thinks that little monsters need to learn to fight their own battles and become strong that way. Do you get it? You had god-damned well better have gotten it.

Back in the waking world, a pair of bank robbers (Sakai Sachio and Suzuki Kazuo) are sneaking around the neighborhood, and it naturally happens that in a gentle, fantastic metaphor for standing up to bullies, Ichiro gets to put his Minilla-given knowledge to the test by trapping the thieves for the police. It is very weird. I mean, he stands up to Sancho eventually, but his big emotional release is when he fights the bank robbers who haven't been part of his problems at all, and the Sancho thing is more of an epilogue. It's very weird and completely savages the delicate domestic story that is the only part of All Monsters Attack that you can defend on any level.

Setting aside that spectacularly out-of-place finale, the film isn't completely unacceptable on its own very specific level. I do wish that Honda and Sekizawa had come down a bit more clearly on clarifying whether or not Godzilla and Monster Island exist in this reality, or if the film takes place in our world, and Ichiro watches the exact same movies we do - leaving that ambiguous was deliberate, but it's also just about the only thing that excuses the stock footage and maybe even turns it into a strength, if we imagine that Ichiro is just rehashing his favorite movies in his mind. As it stands, it's just lazy and cheap, with no fewer than three visibly different Godzilla designs cropping up, as well as new scenes shot with the Destroy All Monsters suit, in somewhat reedy condition.

I do greatly admire the design of Gabara, feeling more like a folkloric monster than a lot of Toho's kaiju (he's got some oni in him), but that's absolutely as far as I can take anything that looks like praise for the monster action in the film (which, while honorifically credited to the ill and dying Tsuburaya Eiji, was directed by Honda himself), which already steals from some of the less-exciting fight scenes, and has been crudely edited in. Particularly where Minilla is concerned; size continuity isn't even remotely a consideration in scenes that show human-sized Minilla cutting to Godzilla-sized Minilla in the space of seconds. And with Minilla being even more of a draggy irritant when he talks, that leaves basically nothing of substance or merit in any of the kaiju sequences.

The film doesn't really care, though. Those sequences are just frosting on the actual story, which is decent. Decent-ish. It feels awfully like Ozu Yasujiro's film's about the children of working class stiffs, without the twinkle or the sociology, but if I were a child in 1969 Japan, I suppose I might find Ichiro a tolerable surrogate, and his durability in the face of parentless misery to be inspiring. At the very least, Yazaki is one of the less-annoying child actors in 1960s and '70s Japanese genre cinema, and given that the film is a brisk 69 minutes, we don't have to spend too much time with him anyway. Take out the kaiju material, and All Monsters Attack is mostly painless life lesson stuff for bored kids; but "take out the kaiju material" is one of the worst things you can say in praising a daikaiju eiga. Outside of a deliriously awful, wonderful theme song (absent from the English dub, which is all the justification one needs for watching the film in Japanese), All Monsters Attack has virtually nothing in it that's much fun at all, its bargain basement production sees to that. It's not outrageously stupid enough to be as bad as the very worst Godzilla films, but it certainly deserves to be ranked among the most tedious.

JANUARY 2014 MOVIE PREVIEW

A new movie year stretches out before us like a virgin field of glistening, beautiful snow, untouched and full of magic and promise. Let us take a moment to enjoy it, before we start to deal with all the slush and black ice and backbreaking shoveling of the movies shortly to pockmark that snow. Because it's January, after all, where decent movies go to die.


3.1.2013

And here's a particularly icy patch of yellow snow to kick things off: Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones, a Latino-themed spin-off of the little franchise that wouldn't die. It would take very little effort for it to be better than the last two in the main line of the series, but "very little effort" is the clarion call of the entire found footage horror genre, so let's say that I'm not stocking up bottles of champagne to celebrate.


10.1.2013

Your standard-issue prestige movie expansion, as Her and Lone Survivor both start widening their nets, but the only really new, really wide release is The Legend of Hercules, an old-school sword-and-sandal picture that, to judge from the advertising, doesn't realise that Greece and Rome weren't the same place. And Renny Harlin directs! Truly, this will be a fantasy epic for the ages.


17.1.2013

Almost half of the movies coming out all month are being dumped in one day, with the breakout film clearly set to be Ride Along, a cop comedy with Kevin Hart doing his Kevin Hart thing. It's even probably going to be the best movie in a generally miserable, wintry landscape, though maybe Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit will find some way to be surprising, because films getting shoved to January at the last minute is a good sign.

In the Land of No Hope, the year's first animated film is a viciously generic-looking comedy, The Nut Job, which wants to be the Rififi of sassy talking animals. And even that's still going to be better than Devil's Due, a "pregnant with Satan's baby" picture that has had the shamelessness to finally adopt the title that every film in its subgenre must have passed by with a shudder at some point.


24.1.2013

In I, Frankenstein, Aaron Eckhart plays Sexy Frankenstein's Monster fighting an army of evil angels. My vote for the "get drunk and go with your friends" release of the month.


31.1.2013

Jason Reitman's Labor Day, having been quietly smacked with an Oscar qualifying release, sneaks out to let the rest of us for Kate Winslet. Also, That Awkward Moment is probably the best way to describe the experience of sitting in the dark, watching a movie in which Zac Efron and Michael B. Jordan can't pee because of their raging Viagra erections.