A thread to discuss movies, TV shows, etc. that you’ve seen in 2025.
10 thoughts on “Movies 2025”
To Kill a Mockingbird (1959)
Dir. Robert Mulligan
Starring: Gregory Peck, etc.
75/100
Putting aside whether the film is a great work of art or not (at least for now), if the American entertainment industry made films and TV shows like this, they would fulfilling the responsibility they have to the larger society. To me, the entertainment industry are the storytellers and myth makers that provide answers to key questions in life–for example, what is really important in life? How should one live? What does it mean to be a man or woman? What do good friendships and romantic relationships look like? etc. I’m not saying they intentionally try to do this–I think these things occur, whether they intend to answer these questions or not–and for the most part they don’t handle this in a responsible way.
If they did, Mulligan’s film adaptation would be a good example, especially Gregory Peck’s Atticus Finch, who not only provides a great role model for for males, but also convincingly portrays a quiet dignity that is admirable–something that I don’t think Jimmy Stewart, a great actor who turned down the role, could not do–at least not as effectively in my opinion.
Having said this, the film did have some flaws for me. For one thing, it did heavy-handed, didactic moments, a la Father Knows Best–moments when the patriarch literally imparts life lessons to his son or daughter. Also, I’m not really keen on the white savior motif. But Peck is so good in this that I can overlook these flaws.
This is a film and a novel that schools should require for American high school students.
One of the cool things about the Criterion Channel is discovering quality films and/or filmmakers I had never heard of. That happened recently with the films of Michael Roemer–Nothing But a Man and Vengence is Mine.
Nothing But a Man (1964)
Starring: Ivan Dixon, Abbey Lincoln, etc.
81/100
I had to recommend really good African-American movies, this would definitely make the list (although Roemer is not black). The film is a bit rough around the edges, with some limited acting. (Lincoln is a jazz singer, not a professional actor.) But in spite of this there were some really moving moments. Additionally, the print I saw was in a good shape, the black and white visuals were very satisfying.
The film is about a black man, Duff Anderson (Dixon), who meets and falls for Josie Dawson (Lincoln), a young, black school teacher and preacher’s daughter. The film follows them as they try to make a life together–specifically focusing the Duff’s struggles. You see Duff will not lower his self-respect and dignity, even if it costs him.
Vengence is Mine (1984)
Starring: Brooke Adams (Jo), Trish Van Devere (Donna), Jon DeVries (Tom), Ari Meyer (Jackie), etc.
78/100
A Lifetime Network film, although fans of the channel may not like this. (Larri hated it.) The plot is a bit too complicated to summarize, but I’ll just say the film follows Jo, who journey’s back to her hometown to visit her mother before moving across country for a new job. While visiting her mother, she meets the neighbor’s daughter, Jackie, and then gets caught up in her life as well as her parents’.
Particular aspects of this movie were fresh, and my liking of the film has a lot to do with this. Additionally, I liked the performance and handling of the characters, especially Trish Van Devere’s performance. I wouldn’t say it’s exceptional–unless you view it within the context of what feels like a made-for-TV-movie.
Night Has a Thousand Eyes
Dir. John Farrow
Starring: Edward G. Robinson, etc.
80/100
One of the more enjoyable movies I’ve seen is Masaki Kobayashi’s Harakiri, which utilized an old fashioned, but surprisingly effective storytelling technique–essentially the main character retelling past incidents or stories. Night used the same technique with the same compelling effect (helped by Robinson’s earnest performance).
This film may not be on the same level as Harakiri, but it’s one of the most enjoyable films I saw so far this year (and maybe longer than that). The film involves a man who makes a living as a kind of carny mind-reader. At some point, however, he claims he receives actual premonitions of the future. Whether it’s real or not, isn’t clear.
I won’t say more, but the film really drew me in and whisked me along–like great stories are wont to do. Unfortunately, this is a rare occurrence, and while the film overall may be exceptional, I gave it a high score because of this. Also, I liked Robinson in this.
***
(Spoiler) There was a very amusing part of the film that has a connection to a Taxi episode, making me laugh out loud at some points.
Sticking with films I enjoyed because of the way it carried me along, here are two others, that aren’t exceptional, but I enjoyed because of the filmmaking.
The Killer (2023)
Dir. David Fincher
Starring: Michael Fassbender, etc.
74/100
(I’m disappointed this was one of the better photos I could find. I also didn’t really care for the movie poster.)
The film features an assassin at work, with his voiceover commentary. This, plus the overall dark, harshly lit look of the film and the indsturial, glitch score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, made me enjoy this film quite a bit. Again, while not an exceptional film, the filmmaking is quite excellent, including the overall structure and pacing.
***
I haven’t really figured out the film’s overall idea or theme. It starts off with the assassin embracing a Nietzschean Uber-mensch mindset, but by the end he seems to realize that he’s closer to the herd.
Bright Future (2003)
Dir. Kiyoshi Kurosawa
72/100
I don’t care for horror films, but I like when Kurosawa works in the genre as he is thoughtful filmmaker has interesting ideas behind his films, rather than gratuitous gore and violence. This film is no different–basically examining a darker side of twenty-something slackers.
(Note: The film deserves more time and analysis, including the metaphor of the jellyfish, but I’m too lazy to do so.)
First, two films that featured interesting central characters–characters that would attract good actors and would win awards if the actors turned in a good performance. In my opinion, that didn’t happen in these next two films, and maybe it wasn’t entirely the actors’ fault.
I Care a Lot (2018)
Dir. J. Blakeson
Starring: Rosemund Pike, Peter Dinklage, Dianne Wiest, etc.
Marla Grayson (Pike) makes money by convincing courts to having elderly people committed to her care, which includes controlling their financial assets. But she unwittingly chooses a woman (Dianne Wiest) who is the mother of a powerful figure (Dinklage).
This is one of those mixed genre films–namely, thriller and black comedy–which is really difficult to pull off. It didn’t really work for me. Also, a big problem was rooting against Pike’s character, which isn’t suppose to happen–or at least viewers shouldn’t do so ardently.
These things weakened the film, and maybe they weakened her character/performance.
Miami Blues (1988)
Dir. George Armitage
Starring: Alec Baldwin, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Fred Ward, etc.
Frederick Frenger (Baldwin) is criminal with an original and clever way to make money: he poses as a cop, looks for crimes in progress and initially pretends to stop the crime, but later actually robs the victims. Freddy is not very bright and possibly mentally ill, making him an even more interesting character.
I remember seeing trailers for this when it came out, and I thought this looked like a dumb movie. Seeing it after all these years only confirms my instincts were right. Baldwin isn’t convincing and he can’t pull it off.
The film tries to be a comedy crime story, but it fails, particularly in terms of the comedy.
—
The next two films are based on true stories–both have compelling premises. Woman of the Hour (2023) is based on a true story about a woman who met a serial killer on the Dating Game TV show. Trial By Fire (2018) is about a man who was wrongly convicted of killing his daughters by arson.
In my view, both didn’t warrant a feature film treatment–at least in terms of the actual films they made; longer features on a investigative TV show or magazine article. Indeed, I believe the New Yorker did a piece on the “Trial” story. (I might have read that one.)
My sense is that Anna Kendrick, who starred and directed Woman relished the scenes on The Dating Game, where she takes control of the game, by asking her questions, not the ones given to her. (Whether that actually happened or not, I’m not sure.) The film also makes points about the way female victims of violence are often ignored.
With Trial, they seemed to want to humanize the convicted father, a la Dead Man Walking. It seemed unnecessary to me, but maybe that’s just me. The most interesting part, involving the way they discovered how the house burned down, only took up a third of the film (maybe less).
—
The Major and the Minor (1942)
Dir. Billy Wilder
Starring: Ginger Rodgers, Ray Milland, etc.
(I admit, they make a great attempt at making 32 year old Rodgers look like a 12 year old. And Rodgers’ acting is actually pretty good, considering. It’s still unconvincing and a dumb idea.)
The premise for Some Like it Hot is preposterous enough, but Wilder actually made an earlier film with an even more preposterous premise, and a wrong-headed resolution.
The premise: Susan Applegate (Rodgers) has had enough of NYC, particularly the sexist treatment she receives, and decides to go back home. Unfortunately, train fare increased without her knowing, without the sufficient funds, she decides to pose as a 12 year old, getting a cheaper fare.
Not only does the ploy work on the train staff, it manages to fool an instructor at a military academy, Maj. Philip Kirby (Miland), who assumes a protective, avuncular role over her.
As far as the wrong-headed part, I’ll explain that in the next section as it is a spoiler
***
During the film Susan begins to fall for Kirby, but Kirby sees her as a 12 year old. In the end, she reveals her true age and Kirby, without much trouble, proceeds to pursue romantically. The notion is either creepy or ridiculous.
Movies immediately grabbing the attention of viewers via an intriguing situation is something most viewers have experienced. However, recently, a few movies have grabbed my attention strictly by the cinematic elements–specifically, the composition, camera movement, editing and cinematography. (Before this year, I feel like that has almost never happened to me. Ridley Scott’s For All the Money in the World (2017) and Franticek Vlacil’s The White Dove (1960) are two good examples of that. (Note: I was about to start describing the cinematic aspects that attracted me, but I realize that my descriptions would largely be meaningless.)
Here’s a short description of the films. Money is based on a true story about the kidnapping of an oil tycoon’s grandson. The story is mildly interesting, but doesn’t really explore or reveal any interesting insights. One thing I will say is that the presence of Mark Wahlberg as the head of a oil tycoon’s security, as well as the trailer featuring Wahlberg, is a bit of false advertising. This is primarily a drama.
The White Dove is a Czech film about a invalid boy and a crippled carrier pigeon, and a young girl waiting for the injured pigeon to return. Although the film does have dialogue, the dialogue is minimal and secondary to the images. I think critics would describe this as pure cinema, and it’s really terrific in that regard. I believe I’ve only seen one other film by Vlacil (Marketa Lazarova, which left me cold), but this makes me want to see more of his films.
By the way, on a slightly related note. I mentioned films that capture a viewer’s attention right away with more conventional storytelling. Night of a Thousand Eyes was a great, recent example for that for me. I’ve always valued these films (unsurprisingly), but I feel like value them even more now, partly because they’re fewer and far between. Have you guys seen any films like this–films that get a hold of your attention fairly early and then just sustain this all the way until the end? (Kobayashi’s Harakiri is one of the best examples of this.)
Mudbound (2019)
Dir. Dee Rees
Starring: Jason Mitchell, Garrett Hedlund, Rob Morgan, Mary J. Blige, Carey Mulligan, Jason Clarke, Jonathan Banks
58/100
I heard good things about this film, but I wasn’t really interested in the film because it seemed to mainly show the evils of racism. (In spite of this, I put the film on my list.) I believe racism in America, now and in the past, is horrific. Like films about the Holocaust, the horrors of war or ghetto life (especially for young people), I feel I don’t need any reinforcing of the evils of racism.
But I recently watched the film for two reasons: 1.),Netflix listed it under visually interesting films; 2.) I started watching the film, and I became interested in it.
**
By the end of the film, I felt my initial impressions were vindicated. I almost felt like I wasted my time watching this. I will say that I though Jason Clarke’s performance was interesting. He was completely racist, but he depicted this as if it were natural part of life, not out of some inherent evil in him (like his character’s father, for example). He was still unlikeable, but you got the sense that he knew not what he was doing.
Ear for Eye (2023)
Dir. Debbie Tucker Green
70/100
A (British?) play adapted for the screen. The film is a series of situations involving race. The dialogue was Mamet-like at times, and that made this interesting overall.
Nothing But a Man (1964)
Dir. Michael Roemer
Starring: Ivan Passer, Abbey Lincoln, etc.
82/100
This would probably make my top 10 list of African-American films to see. Contrary to what I said about Mudbound, even though showing evils of racism was a big part of this film, I came away happy to have seen this. I say more in the next section, which has some spoilers.
But I’ll say here that the film has some nice black-and-white photography and while the acting was sometimes limited the film still managed some emotionally effective scenes.
***
The film is actually not just about the evils of racism. The film is actually about what it means to be a man–or a person of integrity and courage; about doing the right thing, even if this comes at a cost. In short, it’s a theme that really resonates with me. I should also say that a few of the scenes really hit me emotionally. The title of the film is also perfect.
Atlas (2024)
Dir. Peyton
Starring: Jennifer Lopez, etc.
69/100
Not great, but entertaining and not really off-putting. With a few changes or aspects of the film that worked better and this could have been a big hit–or at least more successful at the box office.
Atlas (Lopez) skill-set is in military tactics, and she’s after Harlan (Simu Liu), an AI android, created by Atlas’s mother, seeking to destroy humanity. Along with a military unit, Atlas goes after Harlan, who is hiding out on a distant planet.
It’s not the most original or enticing plot, but Atlas has a backstory and inner demons that make this more than guns and explosions. And this aspect of her character comes out through a critical relationship.
**
Unfortunately, these elements don’t entirely work–or something seems to be missing. The execution is fine, but denouement seems a bit underwhelming. The Smith character might be part of the reason for this, as the character was fine, but a tad dull. Ultimately, the conflict with Atlas and its resolution, on a dramatic level, wasn’t very interesting, although it wasn’t completely dull, either.
Also, on a more superficial level perhaps, the design of the robot armor seemed very unoriginal and kinda dull. A more original and exciting design could have elevated this film. (James Cameron would have been an interesting director for this film.)
Love, Death + Robots (4th season)
32/100
In terms of story/plot, all the episodes were disappointing. To be fair, some didn’t have much of a plot (e.g., the one about observations from household appliances), but even these were just OK at best. I could have easily passed on all of them. (At least two episodes involve cats, and they will likely please cat folks.) Note: humor and action set pieces were mostly bland to me. (I did laugh at the air filter sketch, though.)
Barbarella (1968)
Dir. Roger Vadim
Starring: Jane Fonda, etc.
28/100
Dated campy, hippy sci-fi. I’m guessing the Heavy Metal magazine writers and artists grew up watching this film.
The film started out promising, with a zero g striptease, 70’s brass pop and interesting set design (I liked the computer). In world where cgi dominates, real sets and costumes, even campy ones, can be refreshing. The film had some interesting ideas–e.g., violence became outdated– could have lead to something interesting in my view. Ultimately, the film seems to forget out these ideas, and the comedy and whatever suspense, action, and eroticism the film offered became pretty dull. (Jane Fonda is somewhat sexy in this, but also like pretty vacuous, to the point of being unappealing.)
On a side note, it’s interesting that ten or more years later, in something like Buck Rogers and the 21st Century TV show, the vision of the future didn’t really change as much.
The Keep (1983)
Dir. Michael Mann
Starring: Jurgen Prochow, Gabriel Byrne, Scott Glenn, Ian McKellen, etc.
62/100
Nazis occupy a stone fortress. The caregiver gives them some warnings, which go unheeded.
***
The most interesting parts of the film relate to the evil of the Nazi and the entity, especially Dr. Cuza (McKellen) temptation–namely, if he helps the entity, the entity promises to destroy the Nazis.
Side note: The entity reminded me of the comic book villain, Darkseid.
Past Lives (2023)
Dir. Celine Song
Starring: Greta Lee (Na Young/Nora Moon), Teo Yoo (Hae Sung), John Magaro (Arthur), etc..
82/100
Na Young and Hae Song are close, childhood friends in South Korea, but Na Young emigrates to Canada. Many years later, they contact each over the internet. And at some point, Hae Sung visits Na Young (now, Nora), who is a writer in NYC.
I liked several things about this film, which I’ll talk about in the next section.
**
One of my favorite moments of acting occur without dialogue, where actors convey emotions and even thoughts through their facial expressions and body-language. This film has some great examples of this, particularly Greta Lee, who deserved an Oscar nomination (if she didn’t received one).
***
Off the top of my head, I would say this film is primarily about the cost of great ambition and maybe the way ego-centrism is at the heart of great ambition. Nora displays both at a young age–for example, when she cries because she’s no longer first in her class, losing to Hae Song. She’s completely self-absorbed, unaware or indifferent to the way her reaction might hurt Hae Song.
Later, she ends her renewed relationship with Hae Song, because she perhaps senses the relationship may interfere with her ambitions to be a prize-winning writer.
And at one point, Arthur, her husband, wonders to what extent Nora loves him versus just being there and also being a means to getting a green card. Nora says she loves Arthur, but I’m not sure it’s entirely convincing, especially compared to the passion we see between her and Hae Song.
Nora is driven and in control, but we see all of that crumble at the end in marvelous acting sequence between Lee and Yoo.
(On a side note, I feel for Arthur and think he’s a great guy.)
Becoming Led Zeppelin (2025)
Dir. Bernard Macmahon
54/100
The movie chronicles the lives of the members prior to becoming a group, how the group formed, and the way they eventually become a popular band. On some level, this story was fairly dull, especially since the film doesn’t feature memorable anecdotes or in-depth explanations into the actual music or music-making. In spite of this, the story of a relatively unknown group finally making it held my interest.
Strangely, the concert footage and never-played-before John Bonham interview didn’t make a big impact for me, even though the filmmaker showed the reaction of the band members watching the footage and listening to the interview. (Some of the solos on the live footage disappointed me. One thing that stood out: Page seemed like a good rhythm guitar player, particularly strumming the acoustic guitar.)
Still, hearing the music–Plant’s soaring vocals, Bonham’s thump, which, to me, is the ultimate in hard-rock drumming, and Page’s riffs–reaffirmed to me that very few other hard-rock groups are at their level, particularly in terms of that punch-you-in the-face sound.
September 5 (2024)
Dir. Tim Fehlbaum
Starring: Peter Sarsgaard, John Magaro, Ben Chaplin, etc.
70/100
Some of my favorite scenes in Broadcast News involve behind-the scenes activity of a TV news program, particularly the most frenetic moments. September 5 is basically an entire movie of those scenes,
focusing on the ABC Sports team, lead by Roone Arledge (Sarsgaard) and Geoffrey Mason (Magaro), covering the kidnapping of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Overall, I found the film riveting and suspenseful (even though I knew the outcome), albeit a little anti-climatic at the end
The film actually has other similarities to Broadcast News in that it does raise questions about the tensions between informing the public in a responsible way versus entertaining them and winning prestige
Land of Bad (2024)
Dir. William Eubank
Starring: Liam Helmsworth, Russell Crowe, Luke Hemsworth,
Ricky Whittle, Milo Ventimiglia etc.
60/10
The film starts off well, with an appealing premise: an air force drone operator goes out into the Philippine jungles with three elite fighting escorts to rescue a CIA operative, and things get hairy.
The film wasn’t bad, and it held my attention, but the plot turns were a bit disappointing, and I started to become more indifferent to the outcome.
Tron (1982)
Dir. Steven Lisberger
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Bruce Boxleightner, Cindy Morgan, David Warner, etc.
72/100
Here’s what I held up for me:
The action set-pieces, specifically the jalai-like game, the light cycle sequences, and the battles with the identity discuss are still very good. Seeing another movie with that featured the identity discs still appeals to me. (I did see Tron: Legacy, but I didn’t care for that film, and I can’t even remember if they featured the identity discs.)
The f/x and digital world stand up fairly well. The way Flynn journeys into the digital world is something that later films like The Matrix emulated (if I’m not mistaken).
Some interesting story lines–e.g., the existence of creators of programs as a kind of religious belief; the notion of one entity controlling all the information.
What doesn’t hold up: Essentially, film didn’t develop some of the good ideas above. Here are some thoughts on that:
Why does Master Control program want other programs to think “users” don’t exist? Is it because the MC wants programs to think they weren’t designed with a specific or even higher purpose? But then how would they explain their existence? The film could have been stronger if this could have been fleshed out.
The film doesn’t explain the reason the MC doesn’t just immediately kill Flynn? Why put him in the games?
To Kill a Mockingbird (1959)
Dir. Robert Mulligan
Starring: Gregory Peck, etc.
75/100
Putting aside whether the film is a great work of art or not (at least for now), if the American entertainment industry made films and TV shows like this, they would fulfilling the responsibility they have to the larger society. To me, the entertainment industry are the storytellers and myth makers that provide answers to key questions in life–for example, what is really important in life? How should one live? What does it mean to be a man or woman? What do good friendships and romantic relationships look like? etc. I’m not saying they intentionally try to do this–I think these things occur, whether they intend to answer these questions or not–and for the most part they don’t handle this in a responsible way.
If they did, Mulligan’s film adaptation would be a good example, especially Gregory Peck’s Atticus Finch, who not only provides a great role model for for males, but also convincingly portrays a quiet dignity that is admirable–something that I don’t think Jimmy Stewart, a great actor who turned down the role, could not do–at least not as effectively in my opinion.
Having said this, the film did have some flaws for me. For one thing, it did heavy-handed, didactic moments, a la Father Knows Best–moments when the patriarch literally imparts life lessons to his son or daughter. Also, I’m not really keen on the white savior motif. But Peck is so good in this that I can overlook these flaws.
This is a film and a novel that schools should require for American high school students.
One of the cool things about the Criterion Channel is discovering quality films and/or filmmakers I had never heard of. That happened recently with the films of Michael Roemer–Nothing But a Man and Vengence is Mine.
Nothing But a Man (1964)
Starring: Ivan Dixon, Abbey Lincoln, etc.
81/100
I had to recommend really good African-American movies, this would definitely make the list (although Roemer is not black). The film is a bit rough around the edges, with some limited acting. (Lincoln is a jazz singer, not a professional actor.) But in spite of this there were some really moving moments. Additionally, the print I saw was in a good shape, the black and white visuals were very satisfying.
The film is about a black man, Duff Anderson (Dixon), who meets and falls for Josie Dawson (Lincoln), a young, black school teacher and preacher’s daughter. The film follows them as they try to make a life together–specifically focusing the Duff’s struggles. You see Duff will not lower his self-respect and dignity, even if it costs him.
Vengence is Mine (1984)
Starring: Brooke Adams (Jo), Trish Van Devere (Donna), Jon DeVries (Tom), Ari Meyer (Jackie), etc.
78/100
A Lifetime Network film, although fans of the channel may not like this. (Larri hated it.) The plot is a bit too complicated to summarize, but I’ll just say the film follows Jo, who journey’s back to her hometown to visit her mother before moving across country for a new job. While visiting her mother, she meets the neighbor’s daughter, Jackie, and then gets caught up in her life as well as her parents’.
Particular aspects of this movie were fresh, and my liking of the film has a lot to do with this. Additionally, I liked the performance and handling of the characters, especially Trish Van Devere’s performance. I wouldn’t say it’s exceptional–unless you view it within the context of what feels like a made-for-TV-movie.
Night Has a Thousand Eyes
Dir. John Farrow
Starring: Edward G. Robinson, etc.
80/100
One of the more enjoyable movies I’ve seen is Masaki Kobayashi’s Harakiri, which utilized an old fashioned, but surprisingly effective storytelling technique–essentially the main character retelling past incidents or stories. Night used the same technique with the same compelling effect (helped by Robinson’s earnest performance).
This film may not be on the same level as Harakiri, but it’s one of the most enjoyable films I saw so far this year (and maybe longer than that). The film involves a man who makes a living as a kind of carny mind-reader. At some point, however, he claims he receives actual premonitions of the future. Whether it’s real or not, isn’t clear.
I won’t say more, but the film really drew me in and whisked me along–like great stories are wont to do. Unfortunately, this is a rare occurrence, and while the film overall may be exceptional, I gave it a high score because of this. Also, I liked Robinson in this.
***
(Spoiler) There was a very amusing part of the film that has a connection to a Taxi episode, making me laugh out loud at some points.
Sticking with films I enjoyed because of the way it carried me along, here are two others, that aren’t exceptional, but I enjoyed because of the filmmaking.
The Killer (2023)
Dir. David Fincher
Starring: Michael Fassbender, etc.
74/100
(I’m disappointed this was one of the better photos I could find. I also didn’t really care for the movie poster.)
The film features an assassin at work, with his voiceover commentary. This, plus the overall dark, harshly lit look of the film and the indsturial, glitch score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, made me enjoy this film quite a bit. Again, while not an exceptional film, the filmmaking is quite excellent, including the overall structure and pacing.
***
I haven’t really figured out the film’s overall idea or theme. It starts off with the assassin embracing a Nietzschean Uber-mensch mindset, but by the end he seems to realize that he’s closer to the herd.
Bright Future (2003)
Dir. Kiyoshi Kurosawa
72/100
I don’t care for horror films, but I like when Kurosawa works in the genre as he is thoughtful filmmaker has interesting ideas behind his films, rather than gratuitous gore and violence. This film is no different–basically examining a darker side of twenty-something slackers.
(Note: The film deserves more time and analysis, including the metaphor of the jellyfish, but I’m too lazy to do so.)
Now for some films that I deemed less successful.
First, two films that featured interesting central characters–characters that would attract good actors and would win awards if the actors turned in a good performance. In my opinion, that didn’t happen in these next two films, and maybe it wasn’t entirely the actors’ fault.
I Care a Lot (2018)
Dir. J. Blakeson
Starring: Rosemund Pike, Peter Dinklage, Dianne Wiest, etc.
Marla Grayson (Pike) makes money by convincing courts to having elderly people committed to her care, which includes controlling their financial assets. But she unwittingly chooses a woman (Dianne Wiest) who is the mother of a powerful figure (Dinklage).
This is one of those mixed genre films–namely, thriller and black comedy–which is really difficult to pull off. It didn’t really work for me. Also, a big problem was rooting against Pike’s character, which isn’t suppose to happen–or at least viewers shouldn’t do so ardently.
These things weakened the film, and maybe they weakened her character/performance.
Miami Blues (1988)
Dir. George Armitage
Starring: Alec Baldwin, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Fred Ward, etc.
Frederick Frenger (Baldwin) is criminal with an original and clever way to make money: he poses as a cop, looks for crimes in progress and initially pretends to stop the crime, but later actually robs the victims. Freddy is not very bright and possibly mentally ill, making him an even more interesting character.
I remember seeing trailers for this when it came out, and I thought this looked like a dumb movie. Seeing it after all these years only confirms my instincts were right. Baldwin isn’t convincing and he can’t pull it off.
The film tries to be a comedy crime story, but it fails, particularly in terms of the comedy.
—
The next two films are based on true stories–both have compelling premises. Woman of the Hour (2023) is based on a true story about a woman who met a serial killer on the Dating Game TV show. Trial By Fire (2018) is about a man who was wrongly convicted of killing his daughters by arson.
In my view, both didn’t warrant a feature film treatment–at least in terms of the actual films they made; longer features on a investigative TV show or magazine article. Indeed, I believe the New Yorker did a piece on the “Trial” story. (I might have read that one.)
My sense is that Anna Kendrick, who starred and directed Woman relished the scenes on The Dating Game, where she takes control of the game, by asking her questions, not the ones given to her. (Whether that actually happened or not, I’m not sure.) The film also makes points about the way female victims of violence are often ignored.
With Trial, they seemed to want to humanize the convicted father, a la Dead Man Walking. It seemed unnecessary to me, but maybe that’s just me. The most interesting part, involving the way they discovered how the house burned down, only took up a third of the film (maybe less).
—
The Major and the Minor (1942)
Dir. Billy Wilder
Starring: Ginger Rodgers, Ray Milland, etc.
(I admit, they make a great attempt at making 32 year old Rodgers look like a 12 year old. And Rodgers’ acting is actually pretty good, considering. It’s still unconvincing and a dumb idea.)
The premise for Some Like it Hot is preposterous enough, but Wilder actually made an earlier film with an even more preposterous premise, and a wrong-headed resolution.
The premise: Susan Applegate (Rodgers) has had enough of NYC, particularly the sexist treatment she receives, and decides to go back home. Unfortunately, train fare increased without her knowing, without the sufficient funds, she decides to pose as a 12 year old, getting a cheaper fare.
Not only does the ploy work on the train staff, it manages to fool an instructor at a military academy, Maj. Philip Kirby (Miland), who assumes a protective, avuncular role over her.
As far as the wrong-headed part, I’ll explain that in the next section as it is a spoiler
***
During the film Susan begins to fall for Kirby, but Kirby sees her as a 12 year old. In the end, she reveals her true age and Kirby, without much trouble, proceeds to pursue romantically. The notion is either creepy or ridiculous.
Movies immediately grabbing the attention of viewers via an intriguing situation is something most viewers have experienced. However, recently, a few movies have grabbed my attention strictly by the cinematic elements–specifically, the composition, camera movement, editing and cinematography. (Before this year, I feel like that has almost never happened to me. Ridley Scott’s For All the Money in the World (2017) and Franticek Vlacil’s The White Dove (1960) are two good examples of that. (Note: I was about to start describing the cinematic aspects that attracted me, but I realize that my descriptions would largely be meaningless.)
Here’s a short description of the films. Money is based on a true story about the kidnapping of an oil tycoon’s grandson. The story is mildly interesting, but doesn’t really explore or reveal any interesting insights. One thing I will say is that the presence of Mark Wahlberg as the head of a oil tycoon’s security, as well as the trailer featuring Wahlberg, is a bit of false advertising. This is primarily a drama.
The White Dove is a Czech film about a invalid boy and a crippled carrier pigeon, and a young girl waiting for the injured pigeon to return. Although the film does have dialogue, the dialogue is minimal and secondary to the images. I think critics would describe this as pure cinema, and it’s really terrific in that regard. I believe I’ve only seen one other film by Vlacil (Marketa Lazarova, which left me cold), but this makes me want to see more of his films.
By the way, on a slightly related note. I mentioned films that capture a viewer’s attention right away with more conventional storytelling. Night of a Thousand Eyes was a great, recent example for that for me. I’ve always valued these films (unsurprisingly), but I feel like value them even more now, partly because they’re fewer and far between. Have you guys seen any films like this–films that get a hold of your attention fairly early and then just sustain this all the way until the end? (Kobayashi’s Harakiri is one of the best examples of this.)
Mudbound (2019)
Dir. Dee Rees
Starring: Jason Mitchell, Garrett Hedlund, Rob Morgan, Mary J. Blige, Carey Mulligan, Jason Clarke, Jonathan Banks
58/100
I heard good things about this film, but I wasn’t really interested in the film because it seemed to mainly show the evils of racism. (In spite of this, I put the film on my list.) I believe racism in America, now and in the past, is horrific. Like films about the Holocaust, the horrors of war or ghetto life (especially for young people), I feel I don’t need any reinforcing of the evils of racism.
But I recently watched the film for two reasons: 1.),Netflix listed it under visually interesting films; 2.) I started watching the film, and I became interested in it.
**
By the end of the film, I felt my initial impressions were vindicated. I almost felt like I wasted my time watching this. I will say that I though Jason Clarke’s performance was interesting. He was completely racist, but he depicted this as if it were natural part of life, not out of some inherent evil in him (like his character’s father, for example). He was still unlikeable, but you got the sense that he knew not what he was doing.
Ear for Eye (2023)
Dir. Debbie Tucker Green
70/100
A (British?) play adapted for the screen. The film is a series of situations involving race. The dialogue was Mamet-like at times, and that made this interesting overall.
Nothing But a Man (1964)
Dir. Michael Roemer
Starring: Ivan Passer, Abbey Lincoln, etc.
82/100
This would probably make my top 10 list of African-American films to see. Contrary to what I said about Mudbound, even though showing evils of racism was a big part of this film, I came away happy to have seen this. I say more in the next section, which has some spoilers.
But I’ll say here that the film has some nice black-and-white photography and while the acting was sometimes limited the film still managed some emotionally effective scenes.
***
The film is actually not just about the evils of racism. The film is actually about what it means to be a man–or a person of integrity and courage; about doing the right thing, even if this comes at a cost. In short, it’s a theme that really resonates with me. I should also say that a few of the scenes really hit me emotionally. The title of the film is also perfect.
Two sci-fi reviews:
Atlas (2024)
Dir. Peyton
Starring: Jennifer Lopez, etc.
69/100
Not great, but entertaining and not really off-putting. With a few changes or aspects of the film that worked better and this could have been a big hit–or at least more successful at the box office.
Atlas (Lopez) skill-set is in military tactics, and she’s after Harlan (Simu Liu), an AI android, created by Atlas’s mother, seeking to destroy humanity. Along with a military unit, Atlas goes after Harlan, who is hiding out on a distant planet.
It’s not the most original or enticing plot, but Atlas has a backstory and inner demons that make this more than guns and explosions. And this aspect of her character comes out through a critical relationship.
**
Unfortunately, these elements don’t entirely work–or something seems to be missing. The execution is fine, but denouement seems a bit underwhelming. The Smith character might be part of the reason for this, as the character was fine, but a tad dull. Ultimately, the conflict with Atlas and its resolution, on a dramatic level, wasn’t very interesting, although it wasn’t completely dull, either.
Also, on a more superficial level perhaps, the design of the robot armor seemed very unoriginal and kinda dull. A more original and exciting design could have elevated this film. (James Cameron would have been an interesting director for this film.)
Love, Death + Robots (4th season)
32/100
In terms of story/plot, all the episodes were disappointing. To be fair, some didn’t have much of a plot (e.g., the one about observations from household appliances), but even these were just OK at best. I could have easily passed on all of them. (At least two episodes involve cats, and they will likely please cat folks.) Note: humor and action set pieces were mostly bland to me. (I did laugh at the air filter sketch, though.)
Barbarella (1968)
Dir. Roger Vadim
Starring: Jane Fonda, etc.
28/100
Dated campy, hippy sci-fi. I’m guessing the Heavy Metal magazine writers and artists grew up watching this film.
The film started out promising, with a zero g striptease, 70’s brass pop and interesting set design (I liked the computer). In world where cgi dominates, real sets and costumes, even campy ones, can be refreshing. The film had some interesting ideas–e.g., violence became outdated– could have lead to something interesting in my view. Ultimately, the film seems to forget out these ideas, and the comedy and whatever suspense, action, and eroticism the film offered became pretty dull. (Jane Fonda is somewhat sexy in this, but also like pretty vacuous, to the point of being unappealing.)
On a side note, it’s interesting that ten or more years later, in something like Buck Rogers and the 21st Century TV show, the vision of the future didn’t really change as much.
The Keep (1983)
Dir. Michael Mann
Starring: Jurgen Prochow, Gabriel Byrne, Scott Glenn, Ian McKellen, etc.
62/100
Nazis occupy a stone fortress. The caregiver gives them some warnings, which go unheeded.
***
The most interesting parts of the film relate to the evil of the Nazi and the entity, especially Dr. Cuza (McKellen) temptation–namely, if he helps the entity, the entity promises to destroy the Nazis.
Side note: The entity reminded me of the comic book villain, Darkseid.
Past Lives (2023)
Dir. Celine Song
Starring: Greta Lee (Na Young/Nora Moon), Teo Yoo (Hae Sung), John Magaro (Arthur), etc..
82/100
Na Young and Hae Song are close, childhood friends in South Korea, but Na Young emigrates to Canada. Many years later, they contact each over the internet. And at some point, Hae Sung visits Na Young (now, Nora), who is a writer in NYC.
I liked several things about this film, which I’ll talk about in the next section.
**
One of my favorite moments of acting occur without dialogue, where actors convey emotions and even thoughts through their facial expressions and body-language. This film has some great examples of this, particularly Greta Lee, who deserved an Oscar nomination (if she didn’t received one).
***
Off the top of my head, I would say this film is primarily about the cost of great ambition and maybe the way ego-centrism is at the heart of great ambition. Nora displays both at a young age–for example, when she cries because she’s no longer first in her class, losing to Hae Song. She’s completely self-absorbed, unaware or indifferent to the way her reaction might hurt Hae Song.
Later, she ends her renewed relationship with Hae Song, because she perhaps senses the relationship may interfere with her ambitions to be a prize-winning writer.
And at one point, Arthur, her husband, wonders to what extent Nora loves him versus just being there and also being a means to getting a green card. Nora says she loves Arthur, but I’m not sure it’s entirely convincing, especially compared to the passion we see between her and Hae Song.
Nora is driven and in control, but we see all of that crumble at the end in marvelous acting sequence between Lee and Yoo.
(On a side note, I feel for Arthur and think he’s a great guy.)
Becoming Led Zeppelin (2025)
Dir. Bernard Macmahon
54/100
The movie chronicles the lives of the members prior to becoming a group, how the group formed, and the way they eventually become a popular band. On some level, this story was fairly dull, especially since the film doesn’t feature memorable anecdotes or in-depth explanations into the actual music or music-making. In spite of this, the story of a relatively unknown group finally making it held my interest.
Strangely, the concert footage and never-played-before John Bonham interview didn’t make a big impact for me, even though the filmmaker showed the reaction of the band members watching the footage and listening to the interview. (Some of the solos on the live footage disappointed me. One thing that stood out: Page seemed like a good rhythm guitar player, particularly strumming the acoustic guitar.)
Still, hearing the music–Plant’s soaring vocals, Bonham’s thump, which, to me, is the ultimate in hard-rock drumming, and Page’s riffs–reaffirmed to me that very few other hard-rock groups are at their level, particularly in terms of that punch-you-in the-face sound.
September 5 (2024)
Dir. Tim Fehlbaum
Starring: Peter Sarsgaard, John Magaro, Ben Chaplin, etc.
70/100
Some of my favorite scenes in Broadcast News involve behind-the scenes activity of a TV news program, particularly the most frenetic moments. September 5 is basically an entire movie of those scenes,
focusing on the ABC Sports team, lead by Roone Arledge (Sarsgaard) and Geoffrey Mason (Magaro), covering the kidnapping of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Overall, I found the film riveting and suspenseful (even though I knew the outcome), albeit a little anti-climatic at the end
The film actually has other similarities to Broadcast News in that it does raise questions about the tensions between informing the public in a responsible way versus entertaining them and winning prestige
Land of Bad (2024)
Dir. William Eubank
Starring: Liam Helmsworth, Russell Crowe, Luke Hemsworth,
Ricky Whittle, Milo Ventimiglia etc.
60/10
The film starts off well, with an appealing premise: an air force drone operator goes out into the Philippine jungles with three elite fighting escorts to rescue a CIA operative, and things get hairy.
The film wasn’t bad, and it held my attention, but the plot turns were a bit disappointing, and I started to become more indifferent to the outcome.
Tron (1982)
Dir. Steven Lisberger
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Bruce Boxleightner, Cindy Morgan, David Warner, etc.
72/100
Here’s what I held up for me:
What doesn’t hold up: Essentially, film didn’t develop some of the good ideas above. Here are some thoughts on that:
I could go on, but I’ll stop there.