RSS

Monthly Report: April 2013

02 May

I didn’t end up seeing many movies this month. I get into these slumps once a year or so where I just don’t feel like checking much stuff out. Maybe it’s some way for me to recharge my internal movie battery or something. I’ll probably snap out of it within the next month or two.

For those keeping track, I broke one of my New Year’s Resolutions for 2013 this month by failing to watch a Swedish film. It’s unfortunate, but it happens. I’ll try to make up for it later in the year.

Bachelorette (Leslye Headland, 2012)
Yeah, it seems unlikely that this would have been made if not for the success of (the superior) Bridesmaids. That doesn’t mean that Bachelorette isn’t pretty damn funny in its own right, though. I much enjoyed Kirsten Dunst as the alpha bitch. I liked how Rebel Wilson‘s character was treated as a human being rather than someone to laugh at – I prefer how she’s handled here to Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids, for comparison – and both Isla Fisher and Lizzy Caplan nail their respective characters. I had a lot of fun with this one.
4/5

Better Off Dead (Savage Steve Holland, 1985)
Wacky absurd humor proves an ill fit for this formulaic high school rom-com plot. I did get a kick out of the kid riding around on his bike trying to get his two dollars from John Cusack, but the rest of the film was a bit of a dud.
2/5

bully-bus

Bully (Lee Hirsch, 2011)
This documentary packs a heavy emotional punch. I found myself getting angry during parts of this one: angry at the bullies, and angry at the teachers who fail to do anything. The film presents its stories in a compelling way, switching between various persons with their own experiences with bullying, and it’s shot in a nice and varied way. I would have liked a bit more depth to it all, though. Why not try to find out what makes some kids into bullies, or show what effects being bullied can have on someone when they reach adulthood. Still, this is a very affecting film, and one that avoids usual pitfalls of the genre. See it.
4/5

Holy Motors (Leos Carax, 2012)
It was cool to look at, and the multi-faceted performance by Denis Lavant is impressive, but as a whole, this film did little for me. I like my movies a bit more accessible.
2/5

Cassandra’s Dream (Woody Allen, 2007)
What I liked most about this Woody Allen murder-drama was all the little ironies that kept popping up. It’s a very well-written movie with characters acting in ways that make sense, even though the situations may be extreme. Colin Farrell and Ewan McGregor are both competent co-leads, but it’s Tom Wilkinson who really shines in a supporting role.
4/5

tumblr_m2p4ojZPYk1qbxsr0o1_1280

Whale Rider (Niki Caro, 2002)
Simple but sweet story about tradition and progressiveness, aided by its exotic setting and moving performances. Young Keisha Castle-Hughes in the lead is the obvious stand-out, surpassing most actors her age and delivering quite the money scene at around the 2/3 mark of the film.
3/5

Duck Soup (Leo McCarey, 1933)
My first Marx Brothers film. As with my other sampling of old comedies, this one took quite a while before it enveloped me in its groove. I did end up liking it though, largely thanks to Groucho and his motormouth. I’m not sure if I’ll watch more of them or not, though. I’m more intrigued by Chaplin.
3/5

Dredd (Pete Travis, 2012)
There are some obvious similarities to The Raid here, especially that the two films share the same premise of a small group tackling a towering apartment building filled with criminals. But whereas The Raid focused on martial arts, Dredd opts for a more old school American action vibe. It works on its own merits, and it does enough things differently to hold up nicely even next to the superior The Raid. That said, I get the feeling that more could have been done with the Judge Dredd character. I don’t know for sure, as I haven’t read the comics or seen the Stallone flick, but there seemed like there was unexplored territory here.
4/5

Total # of new films seen: 8
Average score: 3.3 / 5
Best film of the month: Bachelorette
Worst film of the month: Holy Motors

 
11 Comments

Posted by on 2 May, 2013 in Okategoriserade

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On gender equality, Oscars, and great female performances

09 Apr

I made a list on Letterboxd recently where I picked my favorite movie nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars each year, as well as ranked the other nominees. Obviously, I skipped years where I haven’t seen at least two of the nominated movies. As I’m still a relative newbie to the world of film, there’s a lot that I haven’t seen, but I still ended up with 27 years where I had seen multiple Best Picture nominees, which is more than I had expected. Since it was a fun exercise, I went ahead and did the same for Best Actor. 22 years for that one. Not too shabby.

Then on to Best Actress, and a disappointing 14 years where I’ve seen at least two Oscar nominees. For 8 of those 14 years, I’ve only seen the bare minimum of two.

What does this mean, then? That what the Academy finds appealing when it comes to movies about women is not the same as what I’m drawn toward? Maybe. Or it could be a symptom of the fact that I don’t tend to gravitate toward movies about women in general.

Is this bad?

I seem to be stumbling upon a lot of writing and works on subjects of gender inequality and feminism lately, whether it’s a gaming website explaining why they won’t back down on the subject of misogyny in video gaming or a tumblr dedicated to showcasing bizarre examples of female anatomy in comic books (somewhat NSFW). I won’t pretend to be fully immersed in these issues, but I do feel they are a problem – a big one at that – and something worth devoting time to at least read about every now and then. The same goes for any kind of discrimination, whether it’s based on gender, sexual orientation, religion, race or what have you.

In particular, what I find worrying is the notion that male is the standard. The norm. The default. This is prevalent in movies too. On the viewer side of things, we have the thing where films about females are often automatically dismissed as “chick flicks”, whereas films with a clearly male perspective are somehow thought of as “for everyone.” Production-wise, there’s the notable lack of female directors and screenwriters compared to males, not to mention the short shelf-life of female actors – once you’re not young and hot any more, it will be harder to get good roles. Compare this to the guys: Brad Pitt is 49 years old, Johnny Depp is 49, George Clooney is 51, and Tom Cruise is 50. Are there any women in Hollywood of that age with as much fame and star power as them? Sandra Bullock (48) perhaps, but after that it’s slim pickings. That’s not even getting into an issue I myself keep wrestling with all the time: the word “actress” itself. Is it okay to use the word? If we have a specific word to refer to female actors, doesn’t that imply that male actors – generally referred to as just “actors” – are indeed the norm? So is using the word “actress” just perpetuating the problem? I feel like maybe it is, and that using “female actor” and “male actor” is no problem, so I tend to opt for the latter myself.

Because in a post on great female performances, why not a pic of Meryl Streep?

Because in a post on great female performances, why not a pic of Meryl Streep?

 

I want to make an effort toward being a more well-rounded movie watcher. I’m not always doing everything I can towards that goal – I still watch way more contemporary films than old ones, for instance – but this recently uncovered Oscars-related gender difference is bothering me in particular. Not because the Academy is to be trusted with recognizing greatness – because that’s not really their thing anyway – but perhaps because even when they turn their eyes toward female actors, they’re still not exactly concerned with rewarding strong female characters, or movies about them, as such. A portion of the performances they nominate for Best Actress can be more accurately described as major supporting roles for male leads. And even then I’m lagging behind in my watching of them.

I’m planning on filling in the blanks as far as Best Actress nominees go anyway. I need to do more, though. Especially for my sanity. After some brief examination of AMPAS’ Best Actress nominated movies stretching back to 1990 (see, I told you I lean contemporary), it’s predominantly important-sounding period biopics. Not saying that these can’t be great films, but diversity is good.

This is where you can help out. I’m open for suggestions of great female lead performances that were not nominated at the Oscars. Preferably undisputed lead roles. If the movie itself is great too, that’s even better. The films don’t have to be new, or American, or anything, really; what matters is that the central performance is a great one.

What are some of your favorite female lead performances NOT nominated at the Oscars?

 
15 Comments

Posted by on 9 April, 2013 in Misc., Oscars

 

Tags: , , , ,

Ebert

04 Apr

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Odds are that if you’re reading this post, you’ve already heard about the passing of Roger Ebert. Perhaps it shouldn’t come as a shock, considering the myriad of health troubles he has been having lately and through the years. But it is. You can’t fully prepare for something like this.

Ebert was instrumental in shaping the way I approach movies. Living in Sweden, I never saw his and Siskel’s TV show as I grew up. My only knowledge of Ebert at the time was just of the very shallow “he reviews movies” variety. Once I started getting into movies big time 5 years ago, this would change. I wanted to gain better understanding of films – not just how they work, but how I as a viewer could approach them. I started looking for critics online through who I could learn, and it of course didn’t take long until I found Ebert and his vast collection of reviews and essays.

I did not always agree with him on what movies are good or bad, but this never mattered. What I liked about his writing was how well he could articulate his thoughts and explain why he felt this or that worked, or why this or that didn’t. Later on, I would read his memoirs “Life Itself”, and find out that his wonderful way with words wasn’t exclusive to the world of film.

One of the main things I took from Ebert was his respect for actors. Rarely would you see him slam an actor in one of his reviews. He understood that an actor is but a small part in a big machine, that acting is a two man job shared by the actor and the director, and that so much of how a character comes across on the screen is out of the actor’s hands. Even when he was underwhelmed by a movie, he wouldn’t place the blame on the actors. But he would praise them whenever he felt it was warranted. This might sound dumb, but I always felt a kinship with Ebert because of how he was one of few critics who shared my admiration for Nicolas Cage. Ebert always called Cage one of the greatest actors of his generation, something I will always agree with no matter how much shit the actor tends to receive.

Not only has Ebert been instrumental in shaping me as a movie-watcher, but he is also one of the main reasons why I blog about films. Even that doesn’t fully cover everything. I have been in awe of how the man has just kep persevering and fighting on in spite of his health troubles and losing his voice. He transformed himself, no longer reviewing on TV but writing more than ever, always with a positive outlook. He fully embraced social media and made his voice heard through it. If there was someone in the world I would say was my role model, it was Roger Ebert.

Words fail me now. Even though I never met the man, I know I will miss him regardless. I end this post with two things. The first is a link to a post I wrote over a year ago, where I briefly talked about Ebert and then shared a number of my favorite quotes of his.

The second is my deepest condolences, which go out to the friends and family of Roger Ebert.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on 4 April, 2013 in Misc., News

 

Tags:

Monthly Report: March 2013

02 Apr

One year ago, I made my first Monthly Report post here on A Swede Talks Movies. I didn’t plan for this at the time, but the Monthly Report has become the real rock of this blog. Even as the amount of posts has decreased throughout the last year, the Monthly Report provides regularity and stability. I like that.

Mighty Aphrodite (Woody Allen, 1995)
The whole Greek theater angle was largely lost on me. The story itself is solid Woody Allen, with a couple of pure gold lines here and there and some effective and affecting performances. Not the best film I’ve seen from the director, as in the end it doesn’t really go anywhere, but it’s a fine enough watch.
3/5

Seeking a Friend for the End of the World (Lorene Scafaria, 2012)
For some reason, I was expecting something more comedic. I was also expecting something not as good as this ended up being. The whole coming apocalypse thing is shown with lots of fascinating details, but the real goodness here comes from the relationship building between Steve Carell and Keira Knightley. Superb chemistry, and I found myself genuinely moved by their story. It’s a healthy reminder of just how great Carell can be with the right material, and of how Knightley is capable of so much more than just looking good in a period dress. Perfect ending, too.
4/5

TheRaid-1

The Raid: Redemption (Gareth Evans, 2011)
Badass to the highest degree.
5/5

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (George Roy Hill, 1969)
I haven’t explored the western genre enough to really say with any degree of certainty that it isn’t my thing, but what I can say is that there is little about the genre that makes me inclined to investigate it further. I liked this movie, though. The banter between Paul Newman and Robert Redford made for a lot of fun scenes, and the story of the two outlaws was compelling stuff. The extended music scenes felt a bit weird, though.
4/5

Shame (Steve McQueen, 2011)
Some movies manage to really get under my skin. It might take a little while, but once they get through, they’re free to work whatever brand of magic they’re capable of, and it’ll just stick with me in a certain way. This does not mean that they’re better movies than others; it just means that they manage to operate in a different manner than most. Shame is such a film, and it achieves it through spellbinding long takes, a tremendous lead performance by Michael Fassbender, and a take on addiction different from the norm in films. The previous McQueen-Fassbender collaboration, Hunger, was a movie I admired more than I liked. Shame, I admire and adore in equal measures.
5/5

Valhalla Rising (Nicolas Winding Refn, 2009)
The most boring movie I’ve seen in quite some time.
1/5

Barry Lyndon (Stanley Kubrick, 1975)
The lavish production of it all is what I found myself liking most about this film. The whole shebang looks great, from the costumes to the art direction to the environments. My main problem is Barry himself, who for most of the film is really quite boring. The story fortunately picks up a bit in the second half. All in all, though, this is one of my least favorite Kubrick films.
3/5

0106_loudclose

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (Stephen Daldry, 2011)
Rough goings early on with this one, as I didn’t like the main character – more to do with the writing than Thomas Horn‘s performance – and found there to be too many shortcuts. Having the kid always carry around a tambourine that he shakes whenever he’s nervous is a lazy way to show his emotional state, for instance. That said, this film definitely managed to win me over as it went along. It unabashedly tugs on the heart-strings, and Daldry ultimately makes it work. Bonus points for fine performances by Max von Sydow and Sandra Bullock.
4/5

Set It Off (F. Gary Gray, 1996)
Very run-of-the-mill bank robbing movie, full of clichés and overwrought melodrama. Not very good.
2/5

Cleanflix (Andrew James & Joshua Ligairi, 2009)
A surprisingly compelling documentary on the business of edited movies, IE when companies buy and edit movies to remove content they deem unsuitable or immoral. Fair arguments are made for both sides of the argument, and while the process to me certainly seems legally wrong, the movie did make me pause to ponder the morality of it. This was more than I expected to do, so that was cool. What drags the movie down is the form, with lots of talking heads and floating text to provide narration. You watch it for what it has to say, not for the way in which it says it.
3/5

The Girl (Fredrik Edfelt, 2009)
Heartfelt and frank story about a 9-year-old girl (Blanca Engström) who has to spend a summer taking care of herself. The clash between childhood and adult life is potent here, and the movie does a good job in sweeping you along in its smooth pace. A Swedish film that rises a bit above the norm.
4/5

About Schmidt (Alexander Payne, 2002)
Jack Nicholson is great here. It’s the kind of performance that make you wish there were more strong meaty roles like this one for older actors out there. The rest of the film is good too, although I was a bit bothered with the over reliance on narration in various forms to tell the story of Warren’s state of mind.
3/5

[Movie]11-14 (2003)

11:14 (Greg Marcks, 2003)
A black comedy thriller of sorts, with a number of different plot threads that intersect with one another. I found the tone of humor to be an ill fit for the more gruesome parts of the story, but it’s nonetheless fun to see in what ways the various plots are connected.
3/5

Morning Glory (Roger Michell, 2010)
The story of a plucky young career woman getting a new job and having to deal with old cranky people in order to show what she can do is nothing new; Morning Glory’s writer Aline Brosh McKenna herself handled similar subject matter four years prior in The Devil Wears Prada. The formula still works here though, largely thanks to Energizer bunny Rachel McAdams and a Clint Eastwood-channeling Harrison Ford. The whole movie is imbued with an energy that many comedies are missing these days, in fact. Everything just clicks. Morning Glory doesn’t break new ground, but it offers for a very fun time regardless.
4/5

Trailer Park Boys: Countdown to Liquor Day (Mike Clattenburg, 2009)
Me and a friend were nursing hangovers and flipping through Netflix when we saw this film none of us had heard about before and decided to give it a go. We didn’t know that it was based on a TV show, and not the first film to be based on it either. Regardless, I enjoyed it. The material itself runs a bit thin at times, as there’s not enough to fully sustain its 102 minutes, but the characters are amusing and have an off-beat kind of dynamic with one another. I found myself wanting to see more of them, so…
3/5

Trailer Park Boys: The Movie (Mike Clattenburg, 2006)
…naturally, I checked out this one too. It’s roughly on par with Countdown to Liquor Day. A bit better paced and with a sharper plot, but it’s not quite as funny – possibly due to less focus on Bubbles (Mike Smith). Nonetheless, I don’t see how you could like one of the films and not the other.
3/5

Skärmavbild 2013-04-02 kl. 11.15.57

Intolerable Cruelty (Joel & Ethan Coen, 2003)
Oddly flat in content for a Coens film, but the humor is there and the cast has a good bit of fun with it all. The ending seemed weird to me, but then that’s par for the course when watching one of the brothers’ movies for the first time, so I’m not holding that against it too much.
3/5

The Substitute (Robert Mandel, 1996)
Pretty bad in most every way, from the clichéed story and poor action scenes to the cheesy acting. But it’s at least the kind of bad that you can laugh at if you watch it with some friends. If I can give Troll 2 a score of 3/5, I can give this one a 2.
2/5

Total # of new films seen: 18
Average score: 3.3 / 5
Best film of the month: Shame
Worst film of the month: Valhalla Rising

 
4 Comments

Posted by on 2 April, 2013 in Monthly Report

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rewatch Ruminations: 4 thoughts on Raiders of the Lost Ark

18 Mar

WARNING! This post does contain some spoilers for Raiders of the Lost Ark, if you for some reason haven’t seen it yet. (What’s wrong with you?)

Read the rest of this entry »

 
4 Comments

Posted by on 18 March, 2013 in Lists, Rewatch Ruminations

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Coming around to Letterboxd

14 Mar

When movie website Letterboxd first started, I tinkered around with it a bit. I made a profile, rated a number of films on there, and explored the diary feature a little. Then I decided that it wasn’t something I needed. I already use a number of different sites to keep track of what I’ve seen, chiefly Flickchart, I Check Movies, and Swedish Filmtipset. Did I really need another one? At the time, the answer seemed to be “no.”

I’m changing my mind now, at least temporarily. I was lead back to the site after I decided to put together a list of all the films I’ve rated 5/5. At first I used IMDB for this, which turned out to be a horrendous battle against a UI dead-set on user unfriendliness. After venting my frustrations about it on Twitter, people told me to use Letterboxd instead. So I did. It became apparent right away that its list-making tool was way smoother, but then I started noticing other things I liked about the site.

(Said list of 5/5 movies is now available here on the blog too under the name 5/5 Solid Gold, and can be reached by clicking it on the top bar.)

The chief thing that makes Letterboxd different from other sites I use is its focus on community. Many websites just have you rating movies in a bubble. Sure, there might be an option to add people as friends, or maybe a forum, but they’re still mostly solitary experiences. Letterboxd is closer to a social network in a way, as you can always see what your friends are up to: what they’ve watched, what they’ve reviewed, what lists they’ve made, what reviews they’ve liked, and so on. It’s all integrated very well.

A typical movie page on Letterboxd.

A typical movie page on Letterboxd.

Another great thing about Letterboxd is its stylish look. Movies are often grouped together in grids by their poster arts rather than in the usual list format – though that’s available too – which is quite pleasing on the eyes. I also dig the way artwork or images from a film is used on its page, softly blurred into the background. Very cool.

So what have I been doing on Letterboxd so far? Mostly, I’ve been rating movies. I have a substantial backlog of films I’ve seen in my life – not as many as a lot of you I reckon, but it’s still in the 1500 range – and this should ideally all be caught up on. I haven’t done this in any organized manner; I’ve mostly looked through recent reviews on the site and rated whenever a movie I’ve seen has appeared, plus I’ve started rating all the films in my collection too. At the time of this writing, I have managed 609 ratings. Still a long way to go.

Letterboxd uses a 5 star rating scale, which suits me fine; 5 steps is what I’m accustomed too using. They allow for half-stars, though. At first I figured I’d ignore those and just use full stars myself, but eventually I realized there were some cases where I was a bit too torn on what score to give, or my memory of a film or its rating was too hazy, and this is where the half-stars come in handy. I’ll use them on Letterboxd, but most likely not elsewhere. I do prefer the logic of a 5 point system only having 5 steps.

The site also allows you to organize your watching in journal style, by which I mean that you can fill out on what particular date you watched a film, and even make entries upon rewatches and how your ratings change and all that. This is very nifty, and I wish it all had existed when I first started getting into movies in a big way five years ago. While I have a lot of time-related data to mine from Filmtipset, entering the whens of all my movies manually on Letterboxd is probably too much work for me to ever go through all my viewing history. We’ll see I’ll use it for future watching, however.

I’ve also made some more lists. In addition to the 5/5 list, I also have one of films I own but haven’t seen yet, and one of films I haven’t rewatched since buying them. I figure having them on display like this might work as an incentive to get around to them sooner. I’ve also started on cataloguing my DVD and Blu-ray collection, but that’s still very much a work in progress and is kept behind the scenes so far. I have some plans for further lists too. It’s weird how making lists can be so fun.

So that’s what I’ve been preoccupied with the last few days. If you’re already on Letterboxd or have been inspired to try it out, do look me up. My profile page is HERE. Maybe we can be friends there too.

 
6 Comments

Posted by on 14 March, 2013 in Misc.

 

Monthly Report: February 2013

28 Feb

As expected due to work, February was a drastic step back in terms of movie quantity to me. 13 new films seen, compared to January’s 42. Such is life. This month offered an even mix of the good and the bad.

Videocracy (Erik Gandini, 2009)
What happens to a country when its president owns 90% of its TV channels? Videocracy takes a look at Italy during media mogul Silvio Berlusconi’s reign as its leader, where TV is – seemingly – all lurid junk and everyone’s obsessed with celebrity. The depiction of Italian television prompts quite a few eyebrow-raising “Is this for real?” reactions in the early goings, but beyond the surface level, there really isn’t much to this documentary. Why not explain how Berlusconi could rise to power? Is there really no alternative to what he’s offering? The film grows less and less focused as it goes on, and there’s no real attempt at analyzing anything. This subject deserves a better film.
2/5

The Phantom of the Opera (Joel Schumacher, 2004)
I love musicals, but this was some pretty dull stuff. Some of the tunes are good, but there’s little emotion in the singing – or in the acting, for that matter. Gerard Butler in particular is an ill fit to play the Phantom, not managing to inject him with either danger or magnetism. The plot just goes on and on and on, and by the end of it, I had completely stopped caring. Nice sets, though.
2/5

Девичник_в_Вегасе_(04)

Bridesmaids (Paul Feig, 2011)
Sometimes I hate writing these mini-reviews for comedies, because it feels like there’s not that much to say other than “it was funny” or “it was not that funny”. Well, this one was funny. Really damn funny. There’s also the much mentioned novelty factor of having a raunchy comedy like this centering around women, so that’s cool too. What really helps to push this one up to greatness levels is the emotional resonance it has regarding friendship, envy, adulthood, relationships and more. Tremendous. Kristen Wiig rules.
5/5

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)
Certain movies you just keep hearing so much about that you start drawing incorrect conclusions about them. I actually expected to dislike this film. I had gotten the idea in my head that this was some dreadfully slow incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo. Which it isn’t. It’s a fascinating story, a true showcase of special effects and audio magic, and an experience quite of its own nature. I won’t pretend to entirely understand the meaning of the ending, but I believe it was Ingmar Bergman who said of his films that he didn’t care if you understood them, as long as they made you feel something. That definitely goes for this one. I wish I can see it on the big screen someday. That must be a trip.
4/5

North by Northwest (Alfred Hitchcock, 1959)
Another good Hitchcock thriller. I’ve come to expect no less from him. I enjoyed the humor in this one, as well as the overt chemistry between Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint. That finale is quite masterful, too.
4/5

Ip Man 2 (Wilson Yip, 2010)
A worthy follow-up to the first Ip Man film. The fight scenes are as cool and crisp as ever, Donnie Yen in the lead is still immensely likeable, and the story is solid indeed. The climactic fight is pretty great, thanks to a novel premise and a bad guy who you just long to see get his comeupance. This one’s an easy thumbs up.
4/5

sr4KT4DV9uTyVaJZwMMXf5LtgeK

Lifeboat (Alfred Hitchcock, 1944)
There’s some interesting notions going on in this film about the deterioration of civilized manners when man is under duress. The humor works for the most part too, but the story is ultimately a bit thin, and the pacing is uneven. I’d say all things considered, this is a good movie, but my least favorite Hitchcock so far.
3/5

Compliance (Craig Zobel, 2012)
It would be so very easy to dismiss the actions of the characters in this film as unbelievable, if not for the fact that this really did happen. Multiple times. With the film being, from what I’ve gathered, a very faithful recreation of one case of it. Mind-blowing, and crucial for the whole film to not buckle and collapse under the weight of the whole thing. There’s little wrong with the execution, and it’s a very compelling watch.
4/5

Safety Not Guaranteed (Colin Trevorrow, 2012)
“It could have been better” sounds like a negative thing to say about a film. I don’t think it necessarily is. Some mediocre movies are just as good as they could have ever hoped to be. There’s nothing there to make you think they could have been great. Time travel movie Safety Not Guaranteed, however, could definitely have been better. This is, in a way, a good thing, because it means there are great ideas and talent present here. If it had just been tighter and more focused thematically. If the sub-plot with Jake Johnson‘s asshole character had felt more relevant to the main story. If the tone of comedy had been more consistent throughout. If all these things had been, this could have been great. As it is, it’ll have to settle for good. It did make me want to learn to play the zither, though.
3/5

ruby-sparks_3

Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris, 2012)
A clever script and some thoughtfulness go a long way. An interesting and funny take on the idea of the perfect mate. Between this one and Little Miss Sunshine, it seems like Dayton and Faris are the ones who truly know how to get the best out of Paul Dano. He was great in LMS, and he’s great here too.
4/5

The House of the Devil (Ti West, 2009)
Cool little slow-burn horror film that emulates the look and feel of the genre of the 70s and 80s. The atmosphere and scares are mostly effective, but the climax can only be described as a letdown.
3/5

Morgan Pålsson – World Reporter (Fredrik Boklund, 2008)
A film about an incompetent reporter (Anders Jansson) who finds himself in the thick of a revolution in a north African country. This movie is a prime example of everything that’s wrong with Swedish comedy. Predictable jokes, one-dimensional characters, moronic plot, and not the tiniest hint of energy or an edge anywhere. Terrible.
1/5

Argo (Ben Affleck, 2012)
Not my pick for Best Picture of the year, but a fine movie it was nonetheless. It’s a fascinating story, and the tension is ramped up very effectively as it builds to its climax. While I prefer Gone Baby Gone and The Town, this is yet another impressive directorial effort by Ben Affleck, who seemingly can do no wrong these days.
4/5

Total # of new films seen: 13
Average score: 3.3 / 5
Best film of the month: Bridesmaids
Worst film of the month: Morgan Pålsson – World Reporter

 
9 Comments

Posted by on 28 February, 2013 in Monthly Report

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 40 other followers