Kingsman: The Golden Circled (2017)

Kingsman was a pleasant surprise the first time. But it's much less fun the second go around. It's kind of tired. There's a handful of Oscar winners somehow. It was a miracle they got Colin Firth the first time, but now they've added Julianne Moore, Halle Berry, Jeff Bridges and Sir Elton John. Elton John is just wacky enough to make it work (he might be the strangest and best part of the movie) and Julianne Moore too, but Berry and Bridges are wasted. And I guess that's part of the farce. This movie is quite long. It's unnecessarily more vulgar without a payoff. The action scenes are very exciting. And the Americans are stereotyped maybe a little too on the nose for comfort.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)

It's good to see an Asian in a leading role! And she's a cool character. Admittedly, Rose and Finn's (two minorities owning the screen!) plot on the casino planet of Canto Bight is kind of irrelevant to the grand scheme of the plot. It's a beautifully designed planet and the chase scene on the streets of Dubrovnik is incredible. There is an anti-war, anti-weapons (slash class warfare) message that is a little on the nose, but I think it's a necessary and welcome addition to the Star Wars galaxy.

They really talk a lot about the Force in this one. It's a good refresher on what the Force actually is. And this one really stretches the limits of the Force. We see new the Force do new things we've never seen before. I can see why the fans might be complaining about this. But I don't think these new powers are too out there.

The movie is quite long. There were a few times I thought the movie was going to end. That has to do with the many subplots having to be contrived together. But they do come together and then culminate in a battle--it is war after all. The final hour of the movie is very exciting. Laura Dern's character gets a brilliant plot that terminates in the most stunning shot of the film, a silent and still frame.

The direction is a clear departure from the previous films, it's artsier. The solid colors stand out: Laura Dern's hair and garb, and the deep red of Snoke's lair, and the red soil against the white dust. Though the movie is clearly a call back to The Empire Strikes Back. It's a little darker, more pessimistic for the Resistance. I won't spoil it all, but what was supposed to be fan service, catering to the fans by recalling the greatest Star Wars movie and then they didn't like it... You know it's a strange world when the critics praise Star Wars and the super fans are the critical ones. I, for one, enjoyed it. 

Gomorrah (2008)

Neapolitan sounds really weird to me. It is not standard Italian, and nothing like the northern dialect I was used to hearing. And the tones of their speech doesn't sound quite as melodic. The film follows five different characters in the Camorra, which apparently has a more clan-like structure than other mafia groups. There is an ongoing feud between clans that manifests itself violently. Pasquale has the most interesting story line, in my opinion--a haute couture tailor who secretly teaches the Chinese factory workers on the side. He is skeptical at first of the Chinese. He returns from his first lesson tired and excited about his good students, their hospitality and their delicious food. It's a moment of cultural understanding that is quite uplifting. The film does acknowledge that there are many minority ethnic groups that live in Italy and compete with the mafia in legitimate and illegitimate businesses. I think that's really part of one of the big takeaways from the film. The mafia is so entangled in society that their illegitimate business is so insidious. Franco proclaims that it is because of his illegal dumping that Italy is in the EU, which ironically and sadly probably has some partial truth to it. The mafia is an integral part of Italian society. And we get to see that here. Where the film slowed down for me was that I didn't find Toto or Marco and Ciro's stories all that interesting.

Jerry Before Seinfeld (2017)

If you like Seinfeld, Seinfeld's style of comedy hasn't changed. He tells jokes from his days just starting out as a comedian, and they're in the exact same vein as his more recent stuff. It's clever, and I appreciate clever but I wasn't really laughing out loud. 

Detroit (2017)

Kathryn Bigelow's last couplef ilms have been about war, the war over there. This film is only slightly different; it's about the war right here, at home in the USA, whether in 1967 or today. "It looks like 'Nam," he says of Detroit, he being a young white police officer who has never been to Vietnam. For him, the Detroit riot is like war (he who abuses and disbelieves a black Vietnam veteran--and it is not lost that the original incident that sets off the riot is a welcome back party for black veterans). But for the African Americans who call this country home, every day is a war, a losing battle, every encounter with the police can result in an illogical death, and in a brazen disregard for civil rights. They are second class citizens, gunned down in the street without reason. It is infuriating listening to the excuses of the white police officers. And what really bothered me was of course, the complicity, of John Boyega's character thinking he's doing the right thing and of the State Police and the National Guard, etc. They choose to save themselves and turn away. A riot is no excuse for ignoring civil rights. The message from Bigelow is clear, that these problems persist in our society today. This movie is a visceral experience, necessary in our current political climate.

I did the film was too long. I understand the point. That the entire system is designed to disadvantage African Americans, from the very beginnings (the interesting animated opening scene) through to the riot, the policing, and the trial. I don't think the trial was really necessary though. The drama was in the Algiers Motel. The trial was just beating us over the head with it. It could have been done more subtly in text. The movie could've ended there, in my opinion.

Faces Places (Visages Villages) (2017)

What a charming, wonderful, whimsical, film about, at it's core, humanity. Agnes Varda is the French New Wave master, the lone female in a club of old men. She has many interesting things still left to say, even at the age of 88. She remains nimble if a little slow, clever, creative, and she still has an auteur's eye, even if her own eyesight is failing her. She embarks on this new journey with JR. Together they have this irresistible chemistry, reminiscent of Snoop Dogg and Martha Stewart. It shouldn't work, but it does. It's so charming that you can't help but smile. The two of them are so quirky together with JR's signature hat and sunglasses and Agnes Varda's bi-colored hair. The movie is about the march of time. It's about preserving moments and faces, old and new, as best we can despite the inevitability of their disappearance, best displayed by Guy in Normandy. The film is so full of joy capturing rural life and humanity at its rawest. But it is equally enjoyable when we just watch Varda and JR's backs, seated next to each other musing about life and Jean-Luc Godard.  

Mudbound (2017)

Wow, what a heartbreaking movie. It's really well done. The time jumps in the story line are really cleverly executed. It's not always immediately obvious until it cuts back to where we had left off. The cinematography is stunning. Downtrodden rural Mississippi is pretty devastating for everyone, black and white, but you know the African Americans have it way worse. The juxtaposition of life in the Jim Crow South with war-torn Europe is night and day for the African American soldiers. This tale of coming home from war is poignant and devastating and exactly what we need. Discrimination in this country still remains abysmal. Dee Rees does an excellent job assisted by strong performances by Carey Mulligan, Jason Mitchell and Mary J. Blige. 

Coco (2017)

Coco is the latest Pixar film, its first non-sequel since Inside Out. Pixar is excellent as usual when running with original ideas. This one has gotten comparisons with The Book of Life (similar theme of Day of the Dead) and Spirited Away (similar plot points). I haven't seen The Book of Life, but Coco is something special. First of all, it's beautiful. The world of the dead is stunningly complex and vibrant and colorful. The animation is just amazing to look at. The first scene with the paper cuts is brilliant. It's beautiful on another level too. Pixar is historically white on the diversity front. They've only featured two three characters of color before: Frozone in The Incredibles, Russell in Up, and Mindy Kaling's Disgust in Inside Out. All of the characters in Coco are Mexican, and the Mexican traditions and culture are conveyed with the utmost respect--they clearly did their research.  The characters' commitment to keeping these traditions and preserving their heritage is beautiful.  Why is this necessary? Because minorities contend with more than just feelings, and family, and parenthood, and obesity...heritage is crucial to our lives and it's important that kids be able to see themselves on screen in our popular culture.

We know Pixar is full of masterful storytellers, but the little things are really clever too.  The interpretation of the process of how the dead return to the world of the living is really brilliantly imaginative, and in line with tradition. Names are really important.The movie is named for the great grandmother Coco. Ask why that is. Ask why the Xoloitzcuintli is named Dante. Yeah, like Dante's Divine Comedy in which Dante tours the afterlife.

My biggest gripe is the Disney-fication of Pixar. There was no Pixar short preceding the film. Instead, we got a 20 minute Frozen "short" that was completely unnecessary. It was very clearly made for TV. And it had no business preceding this Pixar work of art. 

The Glass Castle (2017)

The Glass Castle is very ok. I hear the book is very good, but the movie wasn't really holding my attention. I've read about some key changes between the book and the movie that sort of change the dynamic of the movie. The premise was similar-ish to Captain Fantastic with regards to the unconventional father, but this movie wasn't as novel. It was also reminiscent of the bad parenting of The Meyerowitz Stories, but this movie is less funny and explores childhood more. I thought there would be more elaboration on why they were on the run--I thought that would be the plot that moves the story along, but that's not the case. The strongest bits were the adulthood scenes in which Brie Larson reflects on how her upbringing has affected her. Brie Larson is quite good as is Woody Harrelson. I think the biggest problem with the movie is that it can't decide what it wants the audience to think. They're horrible wacky parents, but are we supposed to sympathize with the parents by the end? Do we want them to reconcile? Not really. Maybe it's a little too sentimental for me. 

Latin History for Morons (Broadway) (2017)

John Leguizamo's newest one-man show transferred to Broadway after a successful run at the Public last year. I was bummed that I missed it off-broadway, but I was glad to get last-minute rush tickets to see it on Broadway. I love John Leguizamo; I think he is a naturally funny guy with terrible handwriting. His show incorporates a lot of physical comedy and impressions, things he has always been very good at. But the genius of the show is its timeliness and the poignancy of the themes he explores. The show really resonated with me. It has a lot of heart. Leguizamo does some deep personal introspection about Latino contributions to the history of America. It's a history that is omitted from our textbooks, but an important one. It is the history of America to oppress minorities, to relegate the other, and to psychologically force minorities to put themselves down. Leguizamo feels like a second class citizen in his own country. And that is a problem, a problem to be addressed, an identity crisis Leguizamo tackles with humor. I cannot stress enough how important it is to understand our heritage to improve ourselves. Our stories do not get publicity, it is in fact hidden from us. Leguizamo luckily does his research. He takes some creative liberty with some of the facts, but it is worthwhile.We need these stories in our culture and art. In this toxic age of Trump, Latin History for Morons is a refreshing breath of empowering air. 

Three Colours: Blue (Trois couleurs: Bleu) (1993)

I really wanted to like this film, but I was kind of underwhelmed. It is about so much more than grief. It is about the liberty of a woman without anymore family. Juliette Binoche is absolutely stunning. It's a beautifully shot movie. The colors are striking.  I just wasn't really able to connect with the movie. It didn't move me; I think it may be another one that requires a viewer with more life experienced. Music is very important to the plot of the movie. But I don't think the music was all that good, to be honest. It didn't have the emotional heft that such a movie demanded. The Three Colours trilogy is based on the themes of the French Revolution. And this movie is appropriately uniquely French (the nonchalance of the lover and her child). 

Basic Instinct (1992)

I saw Elle last summer, and was offended by the blatant misogyny of Paul Verhoeven. It is evident that he has been a misogynist for over twenty years. So we know that his depiction of women is offensive, but Verhoeven is actually terrible on all fronts. His depiction of bisexuality/homosexuality is horrendous. And Michael Douglas's heterosexual "hero" is toxic too. It is a little difficult to get past these points. That being said, Sharon Stone is devilishly seductive. Douglas's biases are projected onto the viewer. We know from the start who the murderer is. We are shown her blond locks if you could focus on her hair. And yet we question our recollection because Douglas is so easily manipulated. The plot gets a little muddled towards the end. You have to overlook it. But man, you are kept at the edge of your seat, teeth clenched the whole time. It is suspenseful, even if you know what's coming.  

Coffee and Cigarettes (2003)

Jim Jarmusch's Coffee and Cigarettes is a series of 9 random vignettes centered around the theme of characters--some top notch actors--chatting over coffee and cigarettes, which look good in classy black-and-white. The conversations are abundantly awkward, and that it makes it hilarious and cringy at the same time. Very little happens in some of them (No Problem) and you just wait wanting more. There are some recurring topics of conversation, but the scenes are otherwise unrelated. Some of the best segments are Twins, Somewhere in California, Those Things'll Kill Ya, Cousins, Cousins? and Delirium. 

Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Taika Waititi's first foray into the superhero world of Marvel is one big joke. That's not necessarily new for Marvel, think Guardians of the Galaxy. But the action really takes a backseat to the unrelenting, self-aware comedy. Overall, it is an enjoyable movie. It's just fun. Cate Blanchett must have been paid a ton of money to do a superhero movie, much less a comedic one. She is superb as always. But I think the real star here is Jeff Goldblum. I personally think he is one of the funniest actors in Hollywood. He has this nonchalance to his delivery that is so disarmingly funny. The premise of the plot, which mostly takes place on a bizarre lost junk world run by Jeff Goldblum, is kind of wonky. It is totally irrelevant to the Avengers storyline and even Thor's storyline, an awkward diversion from the main battle. But the actual Asgard part of the arc is rather clever. That is where Ragnarok comes into play. There is a brilliant resolution of mythological proportions. I won't give it away, but the serious part of the plot is actually quite well done.

The Assassin (2015)

This might have the least action of any martial arts film ever. The fight scenes are few, and quite short. I think you need to know what you're walking into, because if you're expecting an adrenaline-filled violent movie (it is bloodless), you're not going to get it here--but that doesn't detract from the artistry of Hou Hsiao-Hsien. The film opens with three black-and-white vignettes, beautifully paced, introducing us to Yinniang. It only gets slower from there. It's a slow burn. You are given time to appreciate the scenery, the absolutely stunning camerawork by Mark Lee Ping-Bin. Every frame is so carefully crafted. There are often frames within frames, obstructed views. The action often takes place in the background, with a veil over the foreground. The camera is very still, it lingers for longer than it has to. But each shot is composed to leave room in the background for ongoing movement in the scene. I admit I did not follow the story. I got it all in the first half, but then it started to lose me. But frankly, it doesn't really matter. You get the major plot points, but it's not about plot, and it's not about action. So what is it about? It's about conveying mood and beauty through visuals, and in that it succeeds. 

Wings (1927)

I caught a free Veterans Day screening of this first Best Picture winner at AFI Silver in Silver Springs, MD with live piano accompaniment. There was a fifteen minute intermission (the second half of the movie is much more exciting), but this pianist played 2.5 hours of music synced to a silent movie, turning her own pages, vamping a bit. It was very impressive. The composer was apparently a student of Dvorak. It is consequentially very melodic. In a silent movie, facial expressions and music have to pull double duty to convey emotion.

This early movie is not just a war film. It is a melodramatic character study. There are a significant number of non-battle scenes that show character evolution. I must say, I was not a fan of our hero, Jack. I know he's supposed to be our American hero, but he treats everyone terribly. Sylvia and David tiptoe around him so as not to hurt his feelings while he has no regard for theirs. I know he's supposed to be the scrappy hero that gets the girl, but he doesn't deserve any of this. He even gets Mary fired! And he can't hold his liquor--that was a weird scene. Also, they get away with some stuff in this pre-Code era.

Visually, it is a very impressive movie. There is the famous scene at the nightclub, with the rigged camera that moves towards our hero seemingly pushing straight through a set of tables and guests. The early scene with the camera on the swing is charming. The climactic battle scene is extraordinary. The number of extras alone, before computers could generate them, is astounding. You see them shooting guns and dropping bombs, crashing planes and causing all this destruction, and you wonder, how did they not kill anyone? It looks so real because it is--how did they do that? And then after reading Wikipedia, I discovered they actually did kill someone. There were two accidents, one fatal. I was even wondering how they got these huge 1920s era cameras on planes? The aerial dog-fighting scenes are incredible for the 1920s. Dunkirk, being in the computer era, is comparatively less impressive. The gunfire is painted in red onto the film, which I'm guessing was only in the restoration.

Good Time (2017)

This is an intense heist movie that takes place in gritty Queens. Robert Pattinson, who has become quite the actor, robs a bank with his mentally challenged brother, who he must free from jail. Basically, anything that can go wrong goes horribly wrong. It's really intense because you're just waiting for the next thing to spiral out of control. It's a combination of the (very) shaky, uncomfortably close camerawork and the unnerving music and Robert Pattinson's frenetic acting that keeps you at the edge of your seat. The dark and shadowy lighting is ominous. I think my heart rate was actually elevated throughout this movie, tensely quivering in anticipation. 

Swagger (2016)

I saw this one at the newly restored Parkway Theater in Baltimore (though in a smaller theater, not the main one) as part of the Young French Cinema Film Festival curated by Professor Mason. It actually screened in the ACID sidebar at Cannes the year I was there. I'm really glad I went to Baltimore to see it because this deeply affecting film was just beautiful. It's a documentary that explores the lives of young African and Arab (and one Indian) schoolkids living in the suburbs of Paris. The banlieue (suburbs) of Paris are notoriously poor and dangerous and non-white. This documentary is refreshing in that it doesn't focus on the negatives. It rather humanizes these children. Olivier Babinet earns their trust and gets the kids to open up and talk honestly, frankly and unreservedly. We hear stories, funny and sad, of these children that no one else listen to. There's this one really magical moment in the middle of the film. We've been hearing from Aissatou who is very shy. We learn that she was abused as a kindergarten student and she doesn't have many friends. But she has chosen to open up to Babinet, and after being unable to even introduce herself on camera, averting her eyes from the lens, she finally looks up into the camera and smiles. You really feel for these kids. The soundtrack is simultaneously haunting and hopeful. It's a really beautiful accompanying soundtrack that matches the tone of the film. The interviews are beautifully shot, and interspersed with silent shots of the other kids, almost as if they're there listening. But we know that they're not.  In a way, this leads us to believe that their stories, though unique, are universally shared experiences. They become part of a community, something bigger than themselves, more than what they could've ever imagined. It gives them hope. I would remiss if I didn't mention the two most memorable scenes. The first is Regis, sashaying into school in his big fur coat with swagger and style galore. The second is Paul, who confidently dances own the street, lipsync-ing like no one is listening (something that I imagine myself doing sometimes--I don't; but I think this looks good on camera with good, fun choreography).

Baby Driver (2017)

Baby Driver feels fresh thanks to Edgar Wright's smart and stylish direction. He brings together slick editing to the beat of a sick soundtrack and brilliant choreography. The beginning of the film has a fantastic tracking shot that sets the exciting tone for the rest of the movie. Is Ansel Elgort cool? Wright makes him cool and he makes an extraordinarily fun and enjoyable movie.

The Meyerowitz Stories (New and Selected) (2017)

There was something really unexpectedly sweet about this family dramedy. I admit that I'm not all that familiar with Noah Baumbach's work but I'm going to describe this as Woody Allen meets Hirokazu Kore-eda. It has the liberal upper-class Manhattan sensibilities of Allen, and the bittersweet family saga of Kore-eda. I used to watch Woody Allen films wondering if that's really how rich, privileged, cultured white people live. I think it's something I aspired to, but I now think that version of affluence is not necessarily attainable or maybe not even desirable--the Meyerowitz's are pretty messed up. Their family dynamic is all over the place. They talk fast over each other (a very cleverly written, difficult-to-execute script) and there is lots of yelling. But they are compelling. These were perhaps the best performances ever delivered by Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller. Comedic actors, they manage a balance between their usual shtick and family drama. It's funny, it's sweet, and emotional at the same time. 

Rashomon (1950)

I was slightly underwhelmed by what some would call the greatest film of all time. The acting is highly exaggerated, hysterical by all parties. I find it interesting that it is sort of in contrast to the typically understated acting in contemporary Japanese films. Kurosawa is a master of storytelling. The film has entered into the common lexicon for its innovative storytelling, four alternative versions of the same story. Who knows which story is true? If any of them are true? Or if they are all embellished truth? Everyone has their own verita. That's not the point. The film gets at something deeper, about human nature. Humans are self serving and our recollections reflect that. The movie dates itself with its gross gender politics. To the modern viewer, it's a little cringy how the woman is made to blame in all versions of the story. 

Icarus (2017)

Bryan Fogel had some extraordinary timing. Fogel began by making a film about doping in sports and in the course of his experiment, he is introduced to Grigory Rodchenkov (a reference that suggests Don Catlin was aware of Russia's systemic doping). Rodchenkov admits to some unbelievable things on camera. He is extremely candid with Fogel, and the two of them develop a relatively close relationship. As time goes by, the international community begins to further investigate new allegations into Russia's state sponsored doping program and Rodchenkov finds himself in the middle of the investigation. And then the core of the film really begins. Fogel is instrumental in helping Rodchenkov escape Russia and blow the whistle on the Russian program he had helped to implement. Rodchenkov toes the line between perpetrator and mastermind and our opinion of him changes over the course of the film. The allegations are wild. The movie is suspenseful, engaging and downright incredible. Fogel and Rodchenkov find a brilliant metaphor in George Orwell's 1984, not coincidentally a dystopian portrait of the Soviet Union. It's a really well made documentary, a searing indictment of our system of drug testing.

L'avventura (1960)

I think it's fair to say that I didn't get it. L'avventura is a misnomer. The Adventure implies that there will be some action, but there is none. And I typically don't mind a film that just wanders for a bit, but I had a hard time empathizing with these older upper class Italians. Is the affair the adventure? I think that's sort of misleading.

The premise is that Anna and her lover and their friends go on a cruise to the Aeolian Islands and Sicily, and while they're on this rock of an island, Anna disappears (spoiler alert: never to be found again). They spend a good deal of time looking for her to no avail, but there's a point in the movie, where they basically just give up and that's that. The plot is abandoned for a new plot, with the old plot serving only as pretext to the new one. Look, I get it. She gets replaced by Claudia. But quite frankly, I'm left unconvinced. She is so distraught at losing her friend one moment, and the next she's falling in love with her friend's lover (which I think happens to abruptly), and then abandons the search. They don't follow all the clues they're given. They forget Anna. Sure, I understand that he's highlighting the emptiness and aimlessness of the bourgeoisie, maybe too rich for their own good. I just have a hard time feeling bad for them. I think La Dolce Vita plays with these existentialist themes in a more engaging way.

That is not to detract from Monica Vitti, who is divine. Her character is emotionally complex and she shows it well. Visually, the movie is beautiful.  I know it's a really big deal. Maybe it requires a second viewing. Maybe I just haven't lived enough yet to fully appreciate it. Or maybe I need to join the ranks of the aristocrats to really get it.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Magnificent. It is an epic three hour artistic feast. It is a visually stunning movie, surely to win the long overdue master Roger Deakins an Oscar. The colors! The futuristic production design that borrows from and yet somehow also modernizes the original. The epicness of each frame is enough to take your breath away. If you can't tell, I loved the look of the movie.

But of course, the strength and beauty of Blade Runner (perhaps of science fiction generally) is its ability to ask the tough questions. What does it mean to be human? In my opinion, this movie is a very natural sequel to the original. It builds off the established themes and pushes the boundary to the next logical steps. The character, less obviously but very effectively, advances this question of humanity. She is a computer program, pure software. She obeys orders. She is made to order. But does her capacity to love make her human? Does the capacity to love make a replicant more human? Does the ability to reproduce make you human? Is there a more abstract idea of a soul that makes us human? It asks the tough philosophical questions.

Denis Villeneuve has proven himself a phenomenal director of science fiction following Arrival. And in the same style, he has a way with reveals that shocks the audience. I won't give that bit away, but the reveal allows the viewer to discover another theme, and that is insignificance. We may find ourselves very important, but is it possible that our stories are insignificant in the arc of history? It's this willingness to tackle grandiose ideas that makes this sweeping movie a pure epic.

The Big Sick (2017)

There's a few really great things going on in The Big Sick that just make you smile. Let's start with the obvious, we need more Asian-American stories in American cinema. South Asian men like Kumail Nanjiani and Aziz Ansari have broken the white stranglehold on rom-coms. Kumail is a fully developed character who must navigate his own heritage and underlying racism to get the girl. I think part of the reason the film lands so well with the audience is that it is based on a real, honest, autobiographical story. It is believable because it is never trying to simply make a statement. It's not a soapbox movie about racism, it's a love story. Kumail is likable, relatable, desirable--so the audience easily empathizes with him. The movie is intelligent and it brings freshness to the rather staid genre. It is rounded out by excellent performances from Holly Hunter and Ray Romano (it's nice to see him again). 

Mike Birbiglia: Thank God for Jokes (2017)

Mike Birbiglia is a pretty funny guy. I was prompted to watch his latest stand up special because Michelle invited me to see him live at the Warner Theater. He's quite good in person. He has very good timing. And his special makes me laugh. He does a bit about being late; the punch line is that there is an infinite amount of time you can be on time, so there is really no excuse to be late (we were almost late, of course). The bit extends the whole set, and he muses that humanity is divided between on-time people and late people. He's a good story teller. And he's quite likable. He's not my favorite, that title belongs to John Mulaney and Tig Notaro, but I'm excited to see what he does next.

First They Killed My Father: A Daughter of Cambodia Remembers (2017)

Angelina Jolie and Cambodia go way back to her days as Lara Croft. And since then, she has had a fascination with the country, adopting a Cambodian child and eventually being granted citizenship. This genuine connection with the country facilitated the production of a sincere film. Genocide is not an easy topic to cover. But she takes great care in crafting a tasteful film to aid in the country's ongoing healing process. Jolie should be commended for supporting Cambodia, hiring local cast and crew, and sharing their stories with a wider audience in Khmer.

The cast is largely made up of first-time actors, including 9-year-old Sreymoch Sareum. She is phenomenal for someone so young playing such a harrowing role. She shows real commitment, intensity and emotion. The movie is from her point of view. She is an innocent child, confused and unaware at first about what is happening around her. It is disorienting, dream-like. Jolie does not hold our hands--the audience is not omniscient, we know as much as our hero does. My main criticism is that there are some major gaps in the timeline. Obviously, this is not a minute by minute account of Loung Ung's experience during the Khmer Rouge regime. But beginning in the mine field scene, time seems to move along much faster without much explanation as to how we get from point A to point B. There are some really key points that I think audiences would be interested to know.

Rithy Panh serves as producer on the film. He is arguably Cambodia's most famous director. I wrote a paper on his film The Missing Picture a few years ago. He is a critical figure in Cambodia's reckoning with its past. In the face of such atrocities, communities need a way to heal. Confronting the pain through film, or through tribunals, is effective. Hopefully, Jolie's film will help too. 

Chasing Coral (2017)

I don't know if I've ever gotten emotional over a nature documentary. But this did it. I first encountered Jeff Orlowski senior year of high school. We went on a field trip to see Chasing Ice at a screening with the director, a Stuyvesant alumnus. The main scientist in this film watched the documentary on a plane and saw an opportunity. Chasing Ice was about documenting the receding ice shelf, using innovative camera technology to adapt to the harsh conditions. Well, in this case, they wanted to document the bleaching of corals around the world and obviously underwater time-lapse photography is a new challenge. Luckily, Orlowski was up for the challenge. The footage is absolutely mesmerizing. They literally capture the coral reefs dying in the fast warming oceans. Some corals on the Great Barrier Reef developed a new fluorescence adaptation to the hot waters. Similar to his previous film, Orlowski documents the process, including failed trials after which they adjust the new tech. The result is powerful footage that should inspire us to do something about global warming. Over the credits is an original song sung by Kristen Bell--thanks to Frozen, it sounds very Disney. But in any case, it sounds hopeful. I don't really like the song, but I appreciate the tone at the end of a movie documenting the beginning of a mass extinction. On the contrast, the song at the end of Chasing Ice performed by Joshua Bell and Scarlett Johansson is hauntingly beautiful. It surprisingly was even noticed by the Academy and was nominated for an Oscar, though it was inexplicably not performed at the ceremony. 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)

I was largely unimpressed by the second installment of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise. The first one was novel, unexpected and knowingly poking fun at itself. The second one has some similar humor, but it doesn't land. It is more annoying and not as witty. We have Kingsman and Deadpool and the Lego Movie--the self-deprecating humor isn't new anymore. It does some things really well though. The music supervision is spot on. The special effects and production design is fantastic. I appreciated the movie's boldest statement, it's depiction of the video game-ification of drone warfare. I did not appreciate Mantis, a dangerous stereotype of a subservient and submissive Asian woman. Drax insults her throughout the film, insults her appearance and her personality. She seems relatively unimportant to the plot, only serving as the butt of a joke. 

Wonder Woman (2017)

Wonder Woman is really quite good. The superhero genre has gotten pretty worn out, but this movie feels fresh. This is loads brighter and happier and better than those other dark, brooding DC movies. I find myself watching a lot of those superhero movies and just not caring about the characters. But these characters are well developed, they're likable and interesting. Gal Gadot and Chris Pine have great chemistry. Admitted, the movie's special effects are kind of cheesy and weak. Whereas superhero movies tend to rely on special effects, this movie has plenty other merits.

The story and production design (and some nice lighting) recreate the WWI battlefront. Much like X-Men and the first Captain America, this movie steeps itself in history. History and quasi-mythology interact in an intriguing way here. They serve as the backdrop for some deeper themes than we're used to. And perhaps most refreshing of all, it stands alone as a singular movie. Yes, it's part of a franchise, but it doesn't just feel like it's building to another movie. It's not just advertising for a brand.  

Patriots Day (2016)

Mark Wahlberg continues his collaboration with Peter Berg, following Lone Survivor and Deepwater Horizon. Does that make a trilogy? They obviously feature a different cast of characters, but Wahlberg consistently plays the American hero. The film perhaps focuses on our fictional hero a little too much. I understand that he is the protagonist but you get the sense that the film wants to be about people. The beginning and end feature a cast of characters that are largely missing from the middle of the film, absent from the action. But they should be the focus, a portrait of a strong and resilient city. The great drama of the film is of course the manhunt that captivates the city. But there is a lot of buildup to get to that point. The omniscient point of view perhaps reduces the thrill because we always know what is happening on the other side.  The film stirs up emotion because it's about a close-knit community. It's Boston. The accents won't let you forget it. 

Five Came Back (2017)

This is a movie for cinephiles and for history buffs and especially for those who love film history like me Films have an important role in history. I took a course on history and film. In war, they played a big role as propaganda, but not everything was propaganda. This three-part documentary tells the stories of five famed Hollywood directors during their service in WWII and their work before and after the war. Legendary directors Frank Capra, George Stevens, John Ford, John Huston and William Wyler all answered the call to service during WWII and they made enormous contributions by documenting the war, not always honestly but always powerfully to effect for the war effort. Modern directors heap praise on their idols, demonstrating their love for the art and their admiration for their cinematic accomplishments. Meryl Streep narrates the documentary.There are some really powerful, emotional moments when the reality of war sets in. They discuss how the war influenced their postwar work, and how their war experiences will always live with them. 

Wind River (2017)

Taylor Sheridan both wrote and directed this film. He's still kind of new to directing but his writing style and signature intensity is distinct after penning Sicario and Hell or High Water. The plot is not too complicated, which allows for more character development. Jeremy Renner's character is richly developed and I think Renner is perfectly cast. You really get the sense that he could be a real person. Elizabeth Olsen is also good but I somehow get the feeling that the role was meant for Sicario actress Emily Blunt. The story unfolds methodically, slowly revealing background details that are constantly hinted at. They are revealed in a way that fits in the narrative and impacts the characters' relationships.

The look of the film is snow everywhere. The harsh cold is really visceral. You really come to understand the misery that is life on the reservation. You feel trapped in the silence and nothingness like they do. It faces some of the challenges the tribes face on the reservation--drugs, missing persons, and lack of resources. There are some strange shots that appear to have someone lurking behind or around the corner. You expect a thrilling surprise but it never comes. It's a bit of misdirection by the director. In fact, there are a lot of things that are left open ended. We never find out what happened to Cory's daughter. Cory doesn't kill the lions. And Cory and Jane do not get together. 

Tracy Morgan: Staying Alive (2017)

It's his first comedy special since his accident. But he's still the same old Tracy Morgan. He's very raunchy, he still has his tagline, and he's still pretty funny. He really only does the one thing though. It's a rather repetitive set. He addresses his accident a bit. I think his best joke is when he says he wouldn't have gotten any money if he was hit by a Bob's Discount Furniture truck. It's not that he can't tell a story. It's that you always know where the story is going cause they all end the same way. It's a fun character. Great for something like 30 Rock. And even great in small doses in stand-up as it does run a lean hour. 

The Lego Batman Movie (2017)

The Lego Batman movie is not quite as good as its predecessor. It's still punny. Its humor is of the fast and ridiculous type. And of course, it is knowingly ridiculous. I really enjoyed the first Lego movie, but I wasn't crazy about this one. I think what I really liked was the Will Ferrell twist. In this film, there are tons of references to previous Batman movies and other cultural references galore but they didn't always land for me. Maybe it was just trying to do too much but I didn't find it as enjoyable. Will Arnett is playing a character that is funny but super annoying in my opinion. And I understand that that's just the character, and it plays with kids, but he was getting on my nerves.Whereas Chris Pratt was a fun and playful character that really fit the personality of Lego. 

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Maybe it's a generational thing, but I think I'll always be partial to Tobey Maguire. He was just the kind of nerdy awkward that Spider-man should be. Tom Holland is maybe more age appropriate for the character, but he's not the right kind of awkward. He's just being a charming kid that strangely calls Aunt May just May. And we see a good portion of his high school life. I really like his Filipino friend Ned. The two of them are believable best friends. The casting diversity is praiseworthy. Spider-man is from Queens after all, the most diverse place on the planet. I appreciate that Peter's love interest (and future love interest?) is African American. And there's a great twist/reveal that screams this-is-a-modern-spider-man.

I don't really appreciate all the Marvel tie-ins. I think it cheapens Spider-Man, who is a standalone character that can pull his own weight without the help of Ironman and the Avengers. I understand that they're playing up the whole kid thing, but I don't see the Avengers taking a backseat in the inevitable sequel. Captain America pulled a cheap trick on us after the credits, with a fake scene. There's also the placement of big enough names in deceptively small roles that I just have this sinking feeling we'll see returning. For example, Donald Glover has only a few lines, but we know he'll be back even though his character is seemingly unimportant.

Joshua: Teenager vs. Superpower (2017)

Netflix continues its streak of inspiring documentaries about rebellion against oppressive regimes, first with The Square, then Winter on Fire and now Joshua. Joshua Wong was a mere teenager when he began his first campaign against the Communist National Education. And when he began to pick up some momentum, a camera crew began to follow his story. With lots of persistence and courage and bravery, Wong eventually succeeded in his goal of halting the mandated National Education. But China continues to crack down on Hong Kong's quickly diminishing freedoms. And the goal evolved. It became bigger, more challenging, near impossible. The documentary's story and scope evolved to become more encompassing. The Umbrella Movement added fuel to the fire that was growing. That scared Xi and now, Joshua and 2 other Demosisto members (the evolved Scholarism) are in jail, political prisoners disqualified from running for office for the next 5 years. The future does not look bright for Hong Kong. Hong Kong may have morals behind its cause, but it finds little support against the behemoth of China. The documentary does a good job of highlighting the scale of young Joshua pitted against Goliath. It captures moments of youth. Joshua gave up a lot of his youth to fight for a cause he believed in, but there are some moments when we see him hanging out with his friends, albeit at a protest, or standing on street corners handing out fliers. But it serves as a reminder that they're kids, brave kids taking on a superpower.

Doctor Strange (2016)

The plot is a little convoluted. If you're not in on the whole Marvel universe and on Doctor Strange in particular, it is a little difficult to follow. His origin story is not an easy one. I wish they didn't keep tying all these movies in together. This would've been perfectly fine as a standalone movie. I'm getting really sick of the MCU.

The visual effects in the movie are super cool. They literally bend reality visually. It's not just cheap tricks. It's mesmerizing and imaginative. Benedict Cumberbatch's American accent is kind of funny. It sounds so strange coming out of his very British mouth. It sounds a little unnatural, like when Emma Watson does an American accent. And on Tilda Swinton, she's fine. She's not Asian. But she is the kind of weird that the Ancient One calls for. Should the actor have been Asian? Well, yes. Would that have actually been a kind of stereotypical character for an Asian actor playing an old, wise, kung fu specialist? Yeah, kind of. 

The Founder (2016)

This movie tells the story of Ray Kroc, founder of McDonald's--that's not McDonald's the restaurant, but McDonald's the chain. It was a very interesting story that I didn't know about, a story of American business. It is really specially American. Ray Kroc essentially steals the idea and runs with it. He's concerned with money and money only. Who's the hero in this movie? I don't think it really glorifies American business. Michael Keaton does not play a particularly likable character. And his character does despicable things in the name of greed. And really, we have him to thank for America's fast-food reputation. Fast food could've been tasty and fresh and still fast if the McDonald brothers had any say. They were about quality control. Where is that now?

And the movie is really all about business. Ray's personal life is totally secondary. Laura Dern's role is very small. She plays his wife. And as their marriage falls apart, we don't really get to much insight. His second wife features in a few scenes. But we don't really see their relationship develop. It's all business all the time.

The best scene is the one in which the McDonald brothers explain their brilliant concept to Ray Kroc. There is a great rhythmic cadence to the scene that has excitement and momentum. It's really magical how they build their restaurant from the ground up bringing a new restaurant design and concept to the world. The brothers have fantastic awkward chemistry with each other, co-telling this story. The scene works really beautifully.

Atomic Blonde (2017)

I think overall the plot is convoluted, but there are three really good things worth pointing out. One is the use of music. There is a great use of 80s Cold War-era music. Diegetic sound is music incorporated within the scenes in a practical way, and there's lots of it.  The second thing is the movie's use of color. All the action scenes look very stylish and bloody. Some of the fight scenes are actually quite funny because they're a little more realistic in that human beings don't have unlimited stamina. And third, I really love the clever use of reflections. The mirrors are placed perfectly in the scene to reflect different angles of the action. Interesting framing. 

Hasan Minhaj: Homecoming King (2017)

This might just be the best stand-up set so far this year. It is loads better than Minhaj's uneven White House Correspondent's Dinner set. One of the main reasons is I think he comes off a little awkward is because he doesn't laugh at his own jokes. Maybe only twice in the whole set did he laugh. Is he taking himself a little too seriously? Maybe I've just been watching too much SNL where a little bit of breaking is encouraged. But I think he would benefit from a little bit of laughing.

The set is excellent. It's really poignant, personal, hilariously brilliant and simultaneously touching. He tells stories about the immigrant experience. I love how he breaks into Urdu/Hindi without always bothering to translate. He's really unapologetic about being an immigrant. Why should he be? That's the whole point, isn't it? He is a proud Indian-American. His stories are expertly crafted to bring you up and up and then to take you down with a sad part tinged and then a raucous punch line. And the magic questions that pervade his set: Are we entitled to equality? Is equality a privilege? Is racism the price we pay as immigrants?

Really quickly, I'd like to point out the good camerawork. These stand-up specials usually have pretty standard camerawork but the more emotional moments of his set zoom in pretty close to his face. It's much more intimate than the big room he's actually performing. And in the room itself, great lighting.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (2017)

Oprah is powerful as ever, but for some reason she was snubbed of an Emmy nomination. Oprah can do no wrong. I actually thought Rose Byrne was kind of charming. The movie isn't just about Henrietta of course, but about Rebecca Skloot's research process. The story of the Lacks family is as much Henrietta's story as her own life for in death she continues to bear influence on them. Johns Hopkins has done some horrible things, especially to the local African American population, in its history in the name of science and otherwise. And this film begins to tell us about some of them. What they did with Henrietta Lacks was ethically dubious but official policy is not well-defined. Though I think they were certainly wrong to draw blood from her descendants without properly informing them.

The opening scene in black-and-white, as if on an old film reel, is slickly edited to a drumming soundtrack. It tells you everything you need to know and the drums give it a sense of direction. The rest of the film however, to be totally honest, is a little boring. They have very short cuts to Henrietta Lacks and her life. These scenes serve little purpose because the real drama is in the present. I don't think Renee Elise Goldsberry even has a speaking role. Goldsberry has a very small role in the film, but she actually bears a surprising likeness to Henrietta Lacks. Good casting or good make up.

The Hitman's Bodyguard (2017)

I saw an advance screening of The Hitman's Bodyguard. It's decently funny but not nearly as funny as the loud man in the movie theater would have you believe. It kind of works. Samuel L. Jackson and Ryan Reynolds have this buddy chemistry because this genre of film, that is ridiculous action comedy, suits them both. Ryan Reynolds will never get away from this genre post-Deadpool. And Samuel L. Jackson is well known for yelling profanities in a forceful manner thanks to Quentin Tarantino. It's funny enough to be entertaining and bloody violent. We're in a John Wick-era of violence nowadays--it's becoming rather normalized I think.

The film does do a ridiculous disservice to international law. It has a terrible understanding of the purpose of international law, which I took some offense to as a student of international law. It also does not feature the actual ICC, which I went to in the Hague. The real deal has much more intense security than the movie version I know it's not the point of the movie, but they could've done some research.

Holy Motors (2012)

I've seen a lot of strange films but this might just be the strangest--downright insane. You have literally zero idea what you're watching until about halfway through the movie. And even then, you can only guess. Here's my best guess. Denis Lavant plays an actor, who plays out his assigned scenes not on a set but in the real world, followed by a small unseen camera. He is driven around to the various locations in a limo that doubles as a dressing room. He makes total transformations. Despite the oddness of this movie, it is totally mesmerizing and actually hilariously awkward.

The limo represents the only refuge from the outside world in which he must be someone he is not, even when that is not so obvious. It's a commentary on modern celebrity. Celebrities wear a persona for the outside world. Whenever they exit their limo, they are constantly being watched by unseen eyes. And so they must put on a facade to be the person society expects them to be. It's all fake, dramatized. It's kind of genius.

I just want to pick out a few scenes of note. One follows the character Merde, who also features in Tokyo! We watched this film in Professor Mason's class. It is another crazy character who abducts a silent Eva Mendes. He lives in the sewers and bites a woman's hand. It is probably the most raucously disturbing scene.

Then there are two musical scenes. One is a musical interlude. It is entirely out of place, literally an intermission. Denis Lavant leads an accordion band through a church. It is actually infectious. I've never liked accordion more. His expressions are dispassionate giving nothing away. I'm really unsure what to make of this scene, other than it just being kind of fun. The other musical scene features Kylie Minogue marvelously singing "Who Were We." We are originally led to believe that this is not a scene, but two former lovers meeting by chance. But there is no chance. Everything is scripted, including relationships. Isn't that true in real Hollywood? 

Do the Right Thing (1989)

Do the Right Thing is just as important and poignant today as it was in 1989. Obviously, nothing has changed. Race relations are still tense and police brutality is still rampant. This didn't all of a sudden come out of nowhere and Barack Obama was not a cure-all. Spike Lee sends a powerful message to America.

It's a scorcher. The coloring of the film is tinted a hot red. Everyone is feeling agitated and you feel it too thanks to the reds and oranges. You know that someone is about to erupt. But let's start from the beginning with Rosie Perez dancing the opening credits to an aggressively bold Fight the Power by Public Enemy. Her moves are sharp, sensual, expressive, and absolutely magnetic. It does not glorify violence. But it does beautify it--beauty and fighting are not mutually exclusive.  Violence can be justified, it can be the titular right thing. It's a little more Malcolm than Martin.

Samuel L. Jackson is the radio host who acts as a narrator of sorts. We set the scene in Bed-Stuy on a street shared by African Americans, Puerto Ricans, a Korean grocery and an Italian pizzeria. This itself is beautiful. Not everyone necessarily gets along, but Brooklyn is such a uniquely American locale that all these different cultures could have the opportunity even to clash here. There is the very famous scene of the character staring down the barrel of the camera yelling racial slurs and insults. Even though they are pitted against each other, they are written in such a rich and complete way that the audience can empathize with all of them. We get it. We understand where they're coming from.

Spike Lee is a student of film. There is a very obvious allusion to Night of the Hunter directed by Charles Laughton. Radio Raheem wears LOVE and HATE knuckles and recites Robert Mitchum's monologue. Radio Raheem is perhaps the most symbolic character--his knuckles, his boom box (symbolic of his culture which he wears for all to hear unabashedly), and the ultimate fall of a strongman.

And I'd be remiss if I didn't address the ending. Does Mookie do the right thing? The privileged may see incitement of a riot. But that is wrong. Mookie starts an uprising. Think of the 2015 Baltimore uprising. An oppressed people rising up in self defense a la Malcolm X. Oppression: Why do the majority African American and Puerto Rican population not own any of the businesses on their street? They point out the Koreans are new immigrants and yet they somehow opened their own business. It's not personal. And we see in the final scene that Sal understands that. Sal feels betrayed, but he reconciles with Mookie. The movie is so powerful because it's so real. And it's so real because it is drawn from real society experience.

Wizard of Lies (2017)

There are two cool scenes of note in the latest HBO movie. The first is a dream sequence, or rather a nightmare sequence. It features some really slick editing, cutting in faces of Madoff's many victims. The other is a drumming sequence--drums remind me of Whiplash or Birdman. Drums give you a sense of urgency, of continuity, of panic, and of style. Madoff is at a dinner party, panicking as his clients are asking to pull their money out of the fund. In another instance of cool editing, the drums drive the action in this scene, not the dialogue. Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer are both quite good. The acting keeps the movie afloat during some admittedly boring scenes.

Donnie Darko (2001)

I saw the Director's Cut at a screening at the MoMA. Donnie Darko is weird--that's a compliment. It's a very fitting quote pulled straight from the movie, but in reference to Donnie himself. Weird is perhaps even an understatement. I can't imagine how anyone could possibly have interpreted the ambiguity of the original version. I know there have been criticisms about the Director's Cut engaging in too much hand holding in providing the director's interpretation. But I think I otherwise would have been quite lost. Cause it's just so darn strange.

I think there is an excellent use of music throughout the use of the movie. It really places it in the time period and it is quite stylish. Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal  acting together as siblings is kind of neat. I never realized it before, but I think Jake has kind of gotten typecast-ed as a weirdo (a la Nightcrawler). The plot is kind of brilliant. There is a fantastic combination of comedy and darkness and science fiction alternate universe's and philosophy about religion. It's trippy. 

Sarah Silverman: A Speck of Dust (2017)

Sarah Silverman is edgy. And some of the jokes are genuinely funny. Whereas before it was just plain raunchy, she seems to have gotten better. It's not just raunchy anymore. There's more to her storytelling. She crafts her jokes in a more clever way. I think edgy is a better word to describe her comedy now than raunchy. 

Dunkirk (2017)

This truly is a masterpiece. It is not your typical war film. It does not tread on your emotions. It is not bloody. There is no climactic battle. You never see the enemy. You never see the loved ones on the home front. It is pure war, intense drama.  It is fully immersive. I am now traumatized by that ticking soundtrack by Hans Zimmer (the fan in Morgan's room was making the exact same sound). I saw it in glorious IMAX on 70mm film. Christopher Nolan is the savior of film. Film is somehow old school and also the future of theatrical experiences. The picture was so clear. You could see every face. You wallow in the expanse of the sea and the beach. The cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema is stunning, especially in the aerial scenes. The scenes on the boat were not filmed in IMAX. You can see the ratio is different. It doesn't fill the top and bottom of the screen. But I want to say that the picture looked not necessarily sharper but more vivid and real.

Remember, this is a Christopher Nolan film. Nothing is straight. So we follow three different non-linear narratives. The Mole (the beach) story takes place over a week. The Sea story takes place over a day. And The Air story takes place over an hour. The film cuts back and forth between the narratives without telling the audience what takes place when. You see some scenes in the darkness of night intercut with daytime scenes. You see the boat in the background of the plane scene, watching an event that hasn't yet happened in the Sea story. This is all just brilliant editing and storytelling.

Dunkirk is a point of pride for British people. It was a lost battle, an utter defeat, but a successful retreat. America had not yet entered the war. And that is why American's don't really know what happened at Dunkirk. The focus of the film is strictly on the British. The Germans are never named. The French are not shown, controversially. The Indians are not shown, controversially. But that's not the point. The point here is that Dunkirk is a British success story. This is about British pride. And you never lose focus of that.

The Lost City of Z (2016)

The biggest problem about this movie is that it's so slow. It moves at such a slow pace that I hesitate to even categorize it as an adventure film. Sure, I guess when you're actually an explorer, things don't happen fast all at once. Maybe it's a more realistic depiction. But he spends so much of the film back in Britain. Those adventure-less scenes are decidedly less interesting than the rainforest scenes. I get it, it's about his obsession with the New World. That he's always clamoring to get back. I just didn't think that was particularly interesting. I understand that he was a real person and this is biographical. But it was hard to keep my attention. And despite the slowness, you feel like they skip a lot of things in the middle--like how he is in the jungle one minute and docking back in Britain the next. And I hated how accurately British everyone was--the white man's burden is infuriating. Now for what I did like, the visuals in the rainforest. It is a beautifully shot film. And it is well acted. Charlie Hunnam plays obsessed in a way that's not overdoing it.