• About
  • Videos
  • Music
  • Photography
  • Blog
  • Contact Me
Menu

Raymond Thang

  • About
  • Videos
  • Music
  • Photography
  • Blog
  • Contact Me
×
Us-movie-2019-poster.jpg

"Us” Review

"Us" is the new horror film from Jordan Peele. In it, a family is tormented by doppelgängers. For those who've seen Get Out, you're probably going to see this eventually. And yeah, it's very good. But I think it's one of those movies, that are really fun in the moment but then kind of falls apart when you really think about it.

First things first, Peele has developed this razor sharp style of direction that reminded me of films like The Witch and It Follows (two horror movies that are ingrained into my memory years after viewing them) Every shot and cut feels deliberate and tight. I especially want to mention the prologue that eventually gets revisited in a later scene via match cuts. That particular sequence I'm referring to is, as of writing this review, one of my favourites scenes in a movie... ever. No joke. Also it's cut to Michael Abels' phenomenal traditional classical score which deserves all the praise it can get. To some people, the romantic horror music can sound very cheesy and to others, like myself, it can sound really cool and very memorable. There’s also a great overall use some classic hip-hop and rock tunes that fit those particular scenes in the most ironic way possible.

The movie stars a very enigmatic Lupita Nyong'o in one of the most mind-boggling performances yet. It’s very off-putting and other-worldly at first but as the film wraps up, you’ll realize that her choices and directions might just be even more mind-boggling than you had suspected. Another standout is Winston Duke. He manages to gracefully and perfectly juggle dorky hilariousness with genuine vulnerability and fear. Not to mention that all these actors portray their main characters as well as their doppelgängers.

Just like Get Out, Us’ script is very unique and out there. “Weird” doesn’t begin to describe the mechanics of its world. But it’s this part of the script that falls flat for me. The movie spends a lot of it’s time fleshing out its characters through its relatable and witty dialogue. But then there are these weird and out of place exposition dumps that are there to explain the origins and motives of the doppelgängers. Sure, that’s interesting but I think omitting backstories and implying what’s going would have been more effective and also would’ve been scarier. Instead of having people talking about its mysteries for years to come (think Carpenter’s The Thing and Kubrick’s The Shining), The script simply answers most if not all of the questions you’d have. And I think these moments in particular are really clunky and borderline boring. It’s very unfortunate since the rest of the movie is so well put together.

In the end, Us, is a very unique movie. A lot of its elements work well together. Its strongest moments are some of the strongest moments in its genre while its weaker moments feel too dumb for how smart the movie generally is during the majority of its runtime. By the time the credits roll, Us simultaneously ends up feeling like a smart art house horror movie and a dumb popcorn action flick. Regardless of its flaws, I would still highly recommend everyone to see it.

"Us" Review

Raymond Thang March 23, 2019
Comment
captain-marvel-review-2-1280x720.jpg

"Captain Marvel” Review

Captain Marvel is a weird one. It comes at a time where toxic fan discourse has piqued at an all time high. It also arrives after a movie that has the most dramatic story impact so far in the franchise (Infinity War), and Ant-Man and the Wasp (a movie that arguably does very little to progress the characters and story of the MCU). And not to mention that Endgame is coming right after. A lot rides on this movie. It not only introduces a crucial figure to the current Marvel movie canon but it also introduces a powerful female main character. That's awesome. But it's unfortunate that the main thing that's holding it back is the eponymous character herself.

Brie Larson's Captain Marvel is introduced as a character with amnesia. This runs into a lot of problems. Let's take a character like Iron Man. In the first movie, we get that he's obnoxious, hilarious, and an engineering genius. In Captain Marvel, since she doesn't really know who she is for most of the movie, as an audience member, I feel just as lost as she is. That obviously gets cleared up towards the end of the movie but, damn, is that boring. Not to mention the expository fugazi of the first act throws a wrench into the film's pacing that makes its crucial introduction to the character stand out from the rest of the film in the worst ways while a lingering but non-present Brie Larson performance is kind of just there and adds very little to this character. This is heartbreaking since I adore Brie Larson and I think she and the directors and writers could've done so much to make this character stand out from the rest. They could've made her a super prideful, badass, inter-galactic pilot chick instead of this stoic, stiff character with occasionally awkward, out-of-character bursts of post-Whedon-esque comedy. She's weird and so far her character just isn't interesting enough to carry an entire movie. But I think that was true for movies like Doctor Strange, Captain America, Black Panther, and The Incredible Hulk. I guess my taste in narratives and characters have changed dramatically since then. Although I liked those movies a lot when they came out, I don't really feel the urge to revisit them any time soon. I don't know. But what I'm getting here is that a lot of Marvel heroes feel bland and heroic. Captain Marvel is no different and that's disappointing because we've arrived here so late in the game. I do expect her character to blossom into something great though.

Fortunately, the same can't be said about its side characters though. Which is an anomaly for Marvel movies from the past. Remember Malekith or Yellowjacket or Darcy Lewis? Me neither. The new characters that stand out are the Skrulls. The movie does a phenomenal job introducing their motivations and giving us a far more nuanced interpretation of their characters than I had ever hoped. Ben Mendelsohn as Talos is awesome. Though I can’t really say much about him and the other skrulls due to spoilers. What I can say is that they were definitely my favourite part of the movie. I think Marvel movies need more nuanced characters like them in future installments. Samuel L Jackson is once again great as Nick Fury. There’s still a lot to him to be explored but he stole every scene that he was in. There’s also a lot of vulnerability with his character and his performance compared to that of Larson. Again this is very unfortunate but in a weird way, the dynamic works due to the energy that he brings to his role and to those scenes and the distance that Larson has with these moments. Maybe that was the intention? Lashana Lynch is just as compelling as Jackson is in her role as Maria Rambeau. She’s makes us care for her character but the chemistry between her and Larson wasn’t all there from what I’ve seen. So I feel that that’s a dynamic that doesn’t work. Also I forgot Jude Law was in this movie… Umm, he’s pretty generic if you ask me and I’ve never been a fan of his performances (except for Spy) and this movie does nothing to change my mind about him.

There’s a cute cat! For those that are into that kind of stuff. But a lot of it stands out in a bad way due to some wonky-ass CG and I’m not talking about THOSE scenes (you’ll know what I’m referring to if you’ve seen it) it’s just when they need to get the cat to do something, it’s replaced by a CG model and the difference is noticeably jarring. The action scenes aren’t great and, again, the CG isn’t great either and it takes me out of the experience when I see a poorly rendered aircraft mixed with real environments. This has been the case with a lot of the recent Marvel movies like Black Panther (though it’s not nearly as acrocious as that) and Ant-Man and the Wasp. Thor: Ragnarok, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, and Infinity War look great and distinct but there’s nothing distinct about Captain Marvel visually. I do want to applaud Lola VFX for perfecting their de-aging technology. It’s used for about 80% of the movie and it’s jaw-dropping and seamless. I just love geeking out about stuff like this, okay?!

A lot of people seem to really like the score by Pinar Toprak. I think she uses a lot of interesting and standout textures similar to the synth score in Ragnarok. But, like Mothersbaugh’s work in Ragnarok, as interesting as this is, there are no themes or motifs that stand out for me. I only remember that there were some synth and choir elements in Captain Marvel. It works but it’s nothing remarkable. Captain Marvel’s theme itself seems to be working off of the generic Marvel logo music as well as the Captain America themes (not including Winter Soldier) and it’s super generic and, in my opinion, kind of boring. This isn’t a problem I have exclusively with Captain Marvel but with most Marvel films. I only really remember Avengers, Captain America: Winter Soldier, Iron Man, and the end credits for Doctor Strange. Except for the Avengers motif, there doesn’t seem to be a clear musical direction for this franchise.

In the end, despite all these problems I have with the movie, I still think it’s very enjoyable. It’s bogged down by a dull and sometimes awkward lead performance, a mixed bag of great and not-so-great CGI, and an underwhelming score (though the soundtrack itself is pretty great but I’m a sucker for 70’s-90’s rock/pop music). What really stands out for me is its side characters, and the overall message of the movie. Like, Black Panther, I think the movie has so much heart. And these two in particular are the most important ones in the MCU so far in the grander scheme of things (and I’m not talking about setting up future movies or anything like that). Captain Marvel in particular, tells a moving and at times heartbreaking story about the casualties of war, xenophobia, and fractured identities. And it does that incredibly well despite all its flaws. So when I look back, I’m not going to remember the boring space stuff and the boring protagonist. Instead, what’s gonna stick with me is what I felt when the movie took the time to show me something different and more compelling than the narrative that was originally presented during its first hour. I think everyone should watch this movie and form their own opinion of it. Who knows? You might be pleasantly surprised by where the story takes you emotionally. I didn’t know I would end up feeling so emotional by the end compared to how bored I was during the first half of the movie.

"Captain Marvel" Review

Raymond Thang March 15, 2019
Comment
lords-of-chaos-mit-rory-culkin-jack-kilmer-jonathan-barnwell-und-anthony-de-la-torre.jpg

"Lords of Chaos” Review

2018 had two music biopics that I was looking forward to. One was "Bohemian Rhapsody" (which I thought was the most generic fucking music biopic ever with a pretty great soundtrack and terrific lead performance) and the other was "Lords of Chaos" which chronicles the early era of notorious Norwegian Black Metal band Mayhem.

For those that don't know, the members of Mayhem have been involved in a series of disturbing incidents in the early to mid 90's. *spoilers for real life: there were a series of church burnings, murders, and a suicide.* Mayhem and its members would go on to make some of the most influential music within the metal community and is known due to their notoriety.

Based on a book written Michael Moynihan and Didrik Søderlind and directed by Jonas Åkerlund (ex-Bathory drummer), Lords of Chaos shows us a lot of brutality. There are unflinching depictions of all the things I've mentioned above and will make any normal person shudder. A lot of times, it seems to focus too much on its violent subject matter and not the people that the story is based on. It's like reading a Wikipedia entry and most of these scenes played out as I had imagined in my head when I had read about them. It's well documented but besides Euronymous and Varg Vikernes, I never really knew what the other band members were really about. But kudos to the amount of depth they've brought to those two characters, despite the miscasting of Emory Cohen as Vikernes -whom gives a great performance within the clear limits of the script that was provided. Rory Culkin's Euronymous is actually great and gives a lot of humanity of what had been described of the actual Øystein Aarseth from the people who knew him and this gives a nice perspective to what I had already known about him previously.

The film chose to keep its musical moments sparse (due to how uncomfortable the music can be to newcomers) but the music that was allowed to be used in the film was used well and at good moments. I've heard that a lot Mayhem's contemporaries refused permission to their music and that was true. Mayhem seems to exist in a vacuum in the film's universe and that's very unfortunate. But some songs from Mayhem do make an appearance.

In the end, Lords of Chaos was a bit of a hollow experience. There's a lot that the movie goes over and there are a lot of gruesome scenes that went on for way too long. But the movie comes to life when it focuses on Euronymous' complicated relationship with Dead and Vikernes. But it's not enough to make it an especially memorable experience or an emotional one. Only see this if you're a hardcore black metal band and if you're as fascinated by Mayhem as I am.

PS the Sigur Rós score didn't do this movie any favours.

"Lords of Chaos" Review

Raymond Thang February 25, 2019
Comment
alitabattleangel.jpg

"Alita: Battle Angel” Review

Alita is a film that's been in development for over 20 years. Based on Yukito Kishiro's Gunnm manga, it's a story about a cyborg girl finding out who she is and taking down an evil generic villain or whatever. It's too bad this movie isn't very good at even telling a simple story such as that.

Badass female protagonist, slick production design, great sound design, and groundbreaking visual effects aside, this movie is a failure from a script level. To boil it down to its fundamentals, Alita is 70% wonky exposition, 30% kickass action sequences, and 0% heart. I do kind of enjoy the movie a bit from a superficial level with my favourite scene being one where Alita discovers chocolate for the first time (all in glorious IMAX 3D!). But this reminded me of the scene in two of the Wonder Woman adaptations where Wonder Woman discovers ice cream for the first time. Oh, how I wish I was watching Wonder Woman instead. The environments seem reminiscent of 1995's Ghost in the Shell, a film with great world building and well-handled exposition, and enlightening philosophical introspection. There's also a hint of Blade Runner in there (a franchise with arguably some of the best world building in fiction) and it was during this realization that I thought "wow, this movie is a paradox." It's a movie that can only be realized in the present day due to how far vfx have come but the story itself seems half a century too late to be as revolutionary as the technology that was used to bring the movie to life. It takes and borrows so much from other stories and the movie ends up feeling lost in its identity as something that was clearly created in the past but put in this weird new shiny shell (just like Alita herself but minus the weird fetishistic implications of what her bodies mean in the context of the film to her father figure and to her boring boyfriend).

There are other cyberpunk stories out there that has way more interesting and coherent things to say about humanity. And, as stylish as the action sequences are, there are action movies out there that uses action to tell their story opposed to just being used for the spectacle. For a film that pushes visual effects so far, it never pushes the idea of visual storytelling. There's no other way to say this but Alita: Battle Angel is a massive disappointment and feels really boring despite its amazing visuals.

"Alita: Battle Angel" Review

Raymond Thang February 23, 2019
Comment
how-to-train-your-dragon-hidden-world-2.jpg

"How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World” Review

How to Train Your Dragon is one of consistently great movie franchises out there and luckily this third and final installment is no different. Textures, details, and character nuances are rendered and animated stunningly and is a huge step forward from the previous film (which is saying a lot). There were moments that were so breathtaking and gorgeous, my eyes started to water out of sheer joy (the same thing happened during the second one). The sound design also stands head and shoulders above other mainstream animated films. I especially took a liking to the sound design for wind -an important element for a movie that spends a lot of its time flying, gliding, and falling with giant reptiles. It's something that most people probably won't notice but for someone like me, it makes all the difference.

Similar to the second one, Hidden World has a villain and a very weak one at that that bogs down the otherwise stellar character work and script. Although the final moments are perfect and the series ends in a very satisfying way, it does feel familiar. You'll probably know where it will go by guessing it and I think that's fine for the most part.

The female "light fury" is a joy to watch and seeing Toothless and her interact without dialogue is one of the movie's strengths. Hiccup and Astrid's relationship feels more fleshed out than the other films and they really feel like a believable couple and they are adorable together. This compliments the more mature tale the story is telling about leadership, love, legacy, and belonging and it feels very poetic.

Although it's not the strongest in the trilogy, it's definitely the most stunning. It's a must watch for those who've stuck with the franchise from the very beginning.

"How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World" Review

Raymond Thang February 23, 2019
Comment
image.jpg

"The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part” Review

It's the same brand of meta-humour you've come to expect with a new Lego movie and a new Lord and Miller script. Lots and lots of references to pop culture that will totally go over kid's heads. Stunning animation as usual with great direction with, at times, lightning pacing that can feel too overwhelming to the point of fatigue. It's a fun movie with some heart that isn't as revolutionary as the first movie and most of the jokes, although fun, generally feel repetitive and will trigger a been-there-done-that-so-why-are-we-doing-this-again type of feeling. But it's a solid sequel with some great twists and a fun watch for the kid inside all of us. It's not awesome but it's still pretty great.

My two favourite artists are literally Elliott Smith and Radiohead and this movie managed to reference both of them and include Batman in the scene. Thank you so much for doing that.

"The Lego Movie 2" Review

Raymond Thang February 11, 2019
Comment
Willem-Dafoe-2.jpg

"Shoplifters” Review

“Shoplifters” is a story about a family living in poverty in Tokyo. It’s directed by Hirokazu Koreeda and what I love about his movies is how he portrays “family” and Shoplifters is no different. Early in the movie a day labourer and a boy he refers to as “Shota” (Lily Franky and Kaiji Jo) takes in a neglected little girl (Miyu Sasaki) who has been locked out of an apartment balcony. They live in a cramped house the man’s wife (Sakura Ando), an elderly woman (Kirin Kiki) and her half granddaughter (Mayu Matsuoka). For them, life is terrible but they’re able to cope because they have each other.

It’s a very sad film but also a very joyous and tender one. Terrible things have happened or will happen to these characters. It’s a realistic slice-of-life drama that never feels melodramatic or inauthentic. Koreeda’s highly naturalistic approach to dialogue and editing makes this the most immersive movie I’ve seen this year to the point where the shots, cuts, direction and subtitles become invisible to me. Each character has a backstory that’s buried in their dialogue. Minor characters like the one played by Sosuke Ikematsu only has about two to three minutes of screentime and zero lines of dialogue and has a deep backstory while serving as a beautiful foil to one of the film’s main characters. The movie is dense with little details and motifs that most dramas don’t take the time to establish or develop. It’s a lot to unpack but it moves forward effortlessly through its two hours

Shoplifters won the 2018 Palme d’Or and for good reasons. It’s a deep character study set in an environment that we almost never see being portrayed. It’s one of the best dramas of the year and my favourite Koreeda film by far.

"Shoplifters" Review

Raymond Thang December 27, 2018
Comment
Beale-St..jpg

"If Beale Street Could Talk” Review

“If Beale Street Could Talk” is the latest from director Barry Jenkins and is based the James Baldwin book of the same name. It's a gorgeous love story set in 1970’s Harlem where a man (Stephan James) is convicted of a crime he didn't commit. His lover (KiKi Layne) and extended family fight for his release as they welcome a baby to their family.

Jenkins has a talent for set pieces. Immediately you can see the art direction and costumes’ emphasis on colour. The editing is deliberate, intimate and, at times, hypnotic with meticulous blocking. The performances are grounded and breathtaking from an incredible ensemble cast (Regina King, Colman Domingo, Brian Tyree Henry -dude is in everything!, Michael Beach, Aunjanue Ellis, and Teyonah Parris). Every scene is its own set piece composed with a distinct and beautiful visual sheen backed up by dialogue that cuts as well as it can gush.

Nicholas Britell teams up with Jenkins once more as the film's composer. His neo-romantic classical score adds to the already rich soul and jazz tapestry. They're perfect for the heartbreak and melodrama as well as its more tender and warm moments.

If Beale Street Could Talk is a beautiful story put together by some of the most talented people out there. It has a lot to say about complex social, political and spiritual issues and it's always blunt about it. It's a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. Although its characters are flawed, I hesitate to use that word to describe the movie. I wouldn’t be surprised if it becomes a classic and an important part of the cinematic canon.

"If Beale Street Could Talk" Review

Raymond Thang December 26, 2018
Comment
spider-man-into-the-spider-verse-skyscrapers-artwork.jpeg

"Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” Review

Possible epileptic seizure warning

Holy fucking shit oh my fucking jesus fuck, this movie is awesome.

The idea of difference universes colliding and introducing six Spider-characters seems complicated but the premise itself mainly follows Miles Morales, Peter Parker, King Pin and some Gwen Stacy while the rest of the characters act as background flourishes. For those who’ve liked Spider-Man and super heroes, this movie is for you. It’s a love letter to the franchise and a beautiful introduction to some crowd favourites. The jokes go fast and exposition is often subverted for comedic effect but the pacing always remains steady and the plot beats, for the most part, are super polished.

I love its depiction of Miles Morales (Shameik Moore). He has a beautifully earned character arc and although the movie goes fast, it takes its sweet time developing him and his family. It’s really sweet and I was ugly-crying throughout. Brian Tyree Henry plays his dad and this guy has been killing it lately with Atlanta and Widows and he plays the role with so much heart and vulnerability. He’s a man of the law and he has an estranged brother (Mahershala Ali) and he wants his son to be a better man than the uncle his son looks up to. When the story takes a dramatic turn, it hits at an extremely personal level and it works beautifully. There’s one scene with Jake Johnson’s Peter Parker that had me laughing hysterically and then crying out of intense sadness at the same time. It was great and also, I love this post-hero version of Peter Parker and I would’ve been perfectly content to see the whole movie with just him. I’m also extremely happy to see Spider-Gwen (Hailee Steinfeld) finally. For the longest time Gwen Stacy has been known as the fridged girlfriend before fridging was a thing. In this and her comic stories, she’s the Spider-Woman of her universe. Also she plays drums and that’s awesome -oh my god -yes!!

As well developed as the main characters are, some the villains who show up are simply there for action scenes. King Pin’s (Liev Schreiber) motivation is clear and is quickly established but is in no way as nuanced as other versions of the character, but hey, when you’ve only got less than two hours, you’re gonna have to cut some things out to make it flow better. The same can be said about Spider-Noir, Spider-Ham, and Spider-DVA. They’re there to add more stakes and to make fight scenes more dense and interesting but ultimately don’t really add as much to the movie as you’d assume. That being said, the whole Spidey gang do all get their moments to shine and it’s often hilarious.

You’ll probably notice that this is an animated Spider-Man movie and its unique choppy art style will take some getting used to. I happen to think that this is the most spectacular looking animated thing I’ve ever sat through and if you’re a fan of animation, the movie will blow your mind. It’s also apparently formatted for IMAX and I very much regret not seeing it in a bigger screen. Mix its electrifying animation style with some highly nuanced storyboarding and layered cinematography and we have ourselves some great eye candy.

One big thing I had a problem with is the movie’s music. In particular the contemporary hip-hop and pop songs that were featured. We have artists like Post Malone, Jaden Smith, Lil Wayne, Drake and the late XXXTentacion -all of whom I hate very very very very much and who make terrible, generic sounding music. People I do enjoy like Denzel Curry has a underwhelming feature in the soundtrack and Vince Staples has a track as well that ends up being equally as uninspiring to listen to. It’s shockingly bad, highly disappointing and it doesn’t hold a candle to someone like Biggie Smalls, who’s music was featured in it as well. The score by Daniel Pemberton is also quite generic and sounds like any other Marvel movie. And that’s not a compliment by any means.

“Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” is easily the best Spider-Man movie by far and easily my favourite Marvel movie ever. Some of its music choices are terrible but I guarantee that you’ll love the movie anyway if you’re a fan of animation and or if you’re a fan of super heroes.

There’s a post credits scene btw so don’t leave pls.

"Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" Review

Raymond Thang December 14, 2018
Comment
liz.jpg

"Liz and the Blue Bird” Review

“Liz and the Blue Bird” is a sequel and spinoff to the “Sound! Euphonium” anime series and is directed by Naoko Yamada -whose film repertoire includes “A Silent Voice”, “Tamako Love Story”, and “K-On! The Movie” and she is also known as the showrunner of the series that are associated with the aforementioned movies under Kyoto Animation. After studying and watching her work for the last year and a half, Yamada has become one of my favourite directors and animators ever and I am obsessed with her introspective style. This slightly obscure release became my most anticipated movie of 2018.

You don’t need to have watched Sound! Euphonum to watch this. Liz is a simple standalone story composed with a lot of meticulous parts. The plot follows a highly introverted and awkward oboist named Mizore (Atsumi Tanezaki -a highlight in the series as well as this movie) and an extroverted and sweet flutist Nozomi (Nao Toyama). They play together in their high school ensemble and their goal is to learn this one piece of music that features a conversation between their instruments. The eponymous piece itself tells a story of a girl named Liz whom befriends a Blue Bird, knowing that one day she needs to set the Bird free. It’s a mise en abyme with the two characters in the music representing the main characters’ upcoming graduation. There’s also an extra layer of having almost all of the movie take place in one school with the school becoming a metaphor for a bird cage. Not only do they need to understand the story of the piece they’re performing, they need to understand their feelings for each other before it’s too late.

It becomes immediately apparent in its main opening sequence that the story focuses on body language -something that Yamada’s known for in her storyboarding. The cinematography mixed with Futoshi Nishiya's redesigns of Nikki Asada's original character models give off this highly intimate and almost impressionistic feel. The shots often obscure the characters, and, along with their faces, the camera focuses on their feet and hands. The dialogue is there for exposition sake but the story unfolds through everything that’s not being said.

Akito Matsuda’s eponymous orchestra piece is great and features method performances from the oboist and flute player in the real life recording ensemble. It takes a lot of skill to sound like a real high school ensemble and it was enthralling to listen to the call-and-response between its solo instruments. We get a sense that these characters love playing music at different levels and some players fit better with others during rehearsal. Yota Tsuruoka’s dynamic and often gentle sound direction and Kensuke Ushio’s (aka agraph) experimental score compliments the movie’s, at times, surreal art direction. On the audio side, a lot of the Foley was recorded at the real high school that the high school in the film was based on. And the mixing sounds realistic like the mix in the series. Ushio decided to go with a nontraditional way of scoring the film and used Morton Feldman-esque techniques by incorporating paint blots onto sheet music and forming a lot of the film’s musical ideas around footsteps (some in the tempo of coprime and prime numbers expressed as polyrhythms with slight instances of the footsteps of the main characters syncing up with each other) and other common classroom sounds (chairs moving, beakers clinking, etc.). On the visual side, the animation utilizes water colours and decalcomania in its more abstract and fantastical moments and a lot of extreme close-ups and shallow focus during its grounded moments (something you don’t really see much in animation). Every shot, edit and nervous character tick feels dramatically loaded. Small moments are amplified due to how claustrophobic the setting is and due to the minimalist plot.

The story between Liz and the Bird is written like a story from a children’s book. It works but I found that its dialogue and beats often felt monotonous and a light distraction to its A Plot despite the story being necessary. That being said, I love how vivid the colours were in these scenes and the character designs were fun and storybook-like and it was impossible to not be charmed even though it’s not as cathartic and its moments weren’t as well earned as Mizore’s and Nozomi’s story.

Liz and the Blue Bird is one of the most meticulously crafted movies I’ve ever encountered. It’s ultimately a story about love, and intimacy and can be interpreted through an LGBTQ+ lens. There’s a lot of care put into its visuals and sound design. It’s a beautiful drama about communicating with others -similar to A Silent Voice. The only thing I honestly disliked was the fact that I wasn’t able to see it in theatres.

"Liz and the Blue Bird" Review

Raymond Thang December 9, 2018
Comment
8c1d90deddcbe9a08b39f64d9638f3b24cc536ec.jpg

"The House That Jack Built” Review

Lars von Trier. If you don't know who that is or haven't seen any of his films, “The House That Jack Built” won't be for you.

There was a time when I really admired von Trier. This is an artist who does whatever he wants and doesn't play by anyone's rules. People refer to him as a maverick director. I still maintain that he is a very good artist and has the talent of crafting psychologically complex and flawed characters with the emphasis on the flaws… When he wants to. Dogville, Melancholia, and Dancer in the Dark are still some of my favourite movies ever (though all of these examples have been plagued by the terrible things he has done and/or have said during and after filming). For the most part, I've been able to separate the art from the artist. Until now. To talk about the movie, I think you need to talk about von Trier himself. It's a movie, not unlike Gaspar Noé’s “Love”, where the self references become obnoxiously blunt and the narcissism is the heart of the movie. Both creators thrive from shock value and controversy.

In the movie, we follow Jack (played hilariously by Matt Dillon) a serial killer on a twelve-year murder spree. He believes that the act of murder is a form of art. There are a lot of references to classic paintings, Gothic architecture, Lars von Trier films, Glenn Gould and Bob Dylan -the latter two, along with Jack, serving as metaphors for the real life von Trier and the Lars von Trier movies representing, well, Lars von Trier movies. I couldn't make this shit up even if I tried. It's like that book that the Narrator reads in Fight Club but instead of it being “I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise”, I'm the one who's unsurprised by Jack. It's the closest thing to watching a filmmaker literally masturbate on camera and me and the rest of the audience have all payed and willingly subjected ourselves to this uncomfortable and weird meta experience.

The film is structured into five random “Incidents” each involving graphic murders (to the point of being unbearably repetitive and nihilistic), an artsy epilogue that alludes to more classic art pieces and poetry -all told through a philosophical dialogue between Jack and an older man named Verge (Bruno Ganz). Although the film is slow and the episodes are lengthy, it never feels poorly paced or badly acted (with Uma Thurman, Siobhan Fallon Hogan, Sofie Gråbøl, and Riley Keough presenting highly nuanced and layered performances to often nameless victims and Matt Dillon portraying an organic progression of an awkward, inexperienced killer to a highly intelligent, manipulative, and skilled one by the end). The dialogue is sharp but does suffer from a bit too much exposition and self-indulgence. Its distinct editing and handheld documentary style cinematography (staples of any von Trier project) work wonders for its tension and dark comedy. Five episodes is too much for me personally, we get the point after the first and I mentally checked out after the third. The film barely shows anything new from that point on until its epilogue. It’s a shame since that hasn’t been the case with his movies. The torture and violence is gratuitous and isn’t justified regardless of how entertaining they may be (I know, I’m a sick fuck). The OCD that Jack has makes him interesting and flawed but the film doesn’t go anywhere with it. An image that sticks in my head is how Jack/von Trier describes addiction with an image of a person walking by two street lights with their shadow representing euphoria and dread. Cool moments like these are usually eclipsed by more senseless depraved acts and really begs the question of why the film even exists outside of serving von Trier’s own ego. There’re just so many scenes of a dude mutilating and killing women and children before my body rejects the film entirely and I’d nearly reached my limits with this one.

In a weird way, I’m really glad to have spent time sitting down in a theatre for a one-night screening of its unrated cut in a sold out show on a rainy night. It’s a film that pushes people’s buttons and makes people respond to it through passionate applause and intense disgust. I would say that watching the audience react to the movie was at times more interesting than the movie itself. I’ve had the pleasure to sit with film fans and people who were almost all experienced von Trier viewers, and the experience, in a beautiful way, makes me appreciate going to the movies more. I guess this is less of a review than it is of my emotional reaction to a film. That’s what von Trier wants from his audience and so I guess a reflection is all the more appropriate. All this being said, there was a lot of the movie that I enjoyed and might even have loved sitting through and then there were parts that I absolutely hated. I was less bothered by the violence as I was bored by it. What really bothers me though is von Trier’s narcissism. Since Jack is an extension of of the director, I have similar thoughts to the movie as I do to von Trier himself. I’m conflicted.

"The House That Jack Built" Review

Raymond Thang December 2, 2018
Comment
669240826.jpg

"Ralph Breaks the Internet” Review

A sequel that surpasses the original, "Ralph Breaks the Internet" is a loving portrayal of parenthood that strikes surprisingly deep in its feels. We follow Ralph and Vanellope six years after the first movie. Things are good -granted a bit boring according to Vanellope, but good. Then the steering wheel to her game's arcade machine breaks and now the duo needs to travel to eBay via the internet to purchase a replacement part before her game is permanently removed from the arcade. Though I love how the premise is only scratching the surface of where the movie takes its characters.

The cast of the original returns (great for the most part except for Jane Lynch’s distractingly over-the-top performance as Sergeant Tamora). John C. Riley and Sarah Silverman continue to prove how talented they are behind the mic and their chemistry is undeniably charming. Other standout performances include Gal Gadot's cool as fuck racer character and Bill Hader's understated clickbait pop-up ad user.

Disney animated movies have all been great recently. There are a lot of fun set ups that lead to insanely satisfying pay offs like Ralph's insecurities and Vanellope's desire for something new and ultimately growing up. There's a hilarious extended deconstructive sequence involving Disney princesses that everyone's been talking about, and the way things go, has me excited for where future Disney films take their female protagonists. And also, I now consider Vanellope to be the best Princess of all time. Fight me.

As great as "Ralph Breaks the Internet" is, the majority of its final act does feel a bit too on-the-nose and Hollywood-generic for me to enjoy as I felt genuinely bored with what I was watching. But it was remedied afterward with its heartwarming and bittersweet conclusion. It's a terrific ending and there's a scene after the credits. You'll know what it'll be as soon as the credits roll. Everyone should watch this movie, especially parents.

"Ralph Breaks the Internet" Review

Raymond Thang November 26, 2018
Comment
the-ballad-of-buster-scruggs-james-franco-film.jpg

"The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” Review

“The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” is a six-part western anthology movie by the Coen Brothers. The following are mini reactions to each segment.

#1: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs:

I love the juxtaposition of the Looney Tunes inspired premise and direction mixed with extreme violence. Tim Blake Nelson is likable and cocky and I loved going through his story with the occasional fourth wall break à la Bug’s Bunny. The musical portions are totally Coenian and everything that fans have come to expect.

#2: Near Algodones:

The only thing memorable about this skit is Bruno Delbonnel’s stylish minimalist shot compositions. The ending left me confused and frustrated. Besides that and some darkly comedic moments, this is the most hollow of the segments.

#3: Meal Ticket:

A stand out of the bunch for its cold and melancholic portrayal of mass entertainment and multi-layered performances from Harry Melling and Liam Neeson. It tells a story of a limbless man and an impresario. They struggle to make ends meet and the turn it takes is perfect and dark and although there are words recited, the story between these two characters are conveyed through actions rather than dialogue.

#4: All Gold Canyon:

I love Tom Waits and I love this segment! Based on a short story written by Jack London and backed by Carter Burwell’s gorgeous score, this is a mainly feel-good pastoral chill out sesh with a grizzled and kind prospector. The beauty is in its simplicity. This is a perfect short film that sent me on a low-key emotional roller coaster.

#5: The Gal Who Got Rattled:

This segment’s pacing is a bit weird. It’s three acts feel disjointed and awkwardly stitched together. First it’s about a business deal, then a love story, then a tense action sequence. It features incredible performances from Zoe Kazan and Grainger Hines. The music in the final scene of the segment and its final shot really doesn’t fit with the rest of the segment at all.

#6: The Mortal Remains:

I get what they were going for but the characters and dialogue weren’t interesting enough for me to care about at all. This is the weakest segment in the film and the real tragedy is choosing to end the movie on such a weak note.

Overall, it’s a mixed bag. But I had a good time in general. Especially with the Tom Waits segment.

"The Ballad of Buster Scruggs" Review

Raymond Thang November 18, 2018
Comment
Widows_CampA_banner.jpg

"Widows” Review

"Widows" is exactly what you'd think it is. It's a solid heist film led by Viola Davis and a bunch of bad ass women. There's really not much I can say about it. The cast is solid with incredible performances including standouts like Elizabeth Debicki and Daniel Kaluuya. Steve McQueen's direction is slick and shows an artist at the height of his power. The dialogue, co-written by Gillian Flynn, has a lot of bite and snark. The camera work is gorgeous and always interesting (I especially love the use of long takes and complex camera movements to establish each scene). Sound design is sharp and clear and compliments the at times jarring cuts.

Things that kind of bothered me: There's a political side story that's connected to the heist but the end result lacks the emotional payoff of the actual heisting portion of the movie. Hans Zimmer's score, although effective, feels all too familiar to the point of becoming generic temp music based on other Zimmer scores (I had the exact same issue with 12 Years a Slave).

Widows is almost awesome. But with its lackluster political b-plot dragging it down, the movie has to settle with being just great instead.

"Widows" Review

Raymond Thang November 17, 2018
Comment
Burning-poster001f.jpg

"Burning” Review

For me, not knowing the answer to a terrifying question is scarier than knowing the truth to one. "Burning" is directed by Lee Chang-dong and is based on the short story "Barn Burning" by Haruki Murakami, and in it, we get just that. It's a mystery movie but it comes about half way into a somewhat challenging runtime in a story that's deliberately a slow burn (pun intended and I'm not apologizing). In it, average Joe (Yoo Ah-in) reconnects with a girl (Jeon Jong-seo) from his childhood and things seem fine and dandy for awhile until things take a bizarre turn when a much cooler and sexier dude (Steven Yeun) is introduced.

It plays with the idea of malleable memory mixed with a fragile male ego. Small details are cleverly and dramatically reintroduced later on that add up to vague clues that culminate in what is one of the most memorable endings in any movie I've ever seen. Since the premise doesn't fully get presented until half way in, and there's no way I'm gonna spoil that for anyone, I'm just gonna say that if you're into slow paced atmospheric mysteries, you need to pay close attention and be patient with its storytelling.

Burning is a strange movie. It gives a lot of clues and gives no clear answer. Some movies do this and fail spectacularly but this one makes that tight balancing act look like a cake walk. The movie requires a lot of investment and patience and for a lot of people, it's going to be meandering and boring. But for those who like their mysteries slow, deliberate, and artsy, look no further.

"Burning" Review

Raymond Thang November 11, 2018
Comment
girl-dragon-claire-foy.jpg

"The Girl in the Spider’s Web” Review

"The Girl in the Spider's Web" is directed by Fede Alvarez (Evil Dead remake and Don't Breathe -two movies I like a lot!) and is the reboot and/or direct sequel to "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest" and "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" 2011. I think? I don't know. This movie clearly wants to be both the David Fincher movie and the Swedish films and ends up being a movie that never truly justifies its existence.

The plot follows Lisbeth Salander (Claire Foy) who's this omnipotent hacker badass that clearly thinks so far ahead that it becomes plot breaking. She has to stop some codes from being sent out. I think they activate bombs or something and she needs to save the world or whatever. A premise ripped from Bond, Captain America, Mission Impossible and many other films but minus the over-the-top action set pieces. Honestly, besides some good performances from Claire Foy (as a Lisbeth that's totally different from the character in the other movies and the books and as a version that I totally disagree with) and some pretty looking shots, there's nothing else in here for anyone to enjoy.

If you look at the previous Millennium adaptations, they were doing everything they could to subvert their action scenes. There were scenes of action but they were always very grounded realistic. In a sense, they were never much anti-action movies. In this fourth/second movie, we have an extraordinary action hero doing extraordinary things. Even though she's not invincible, the way things end up going, sure gives the opposite impression of her character. It feels so fake and boring. Also the action was just so distractingly illogical, so, as pretty as they can look, I was too out of it to care. Like, bad guys shooting someone at a short distance and missing almost all of their shots, and a motorcycle landing and gliding perfectly across a frozen lake when it clearly should've went through the ice, and cancelling the effects of drugs by taking more drugs. What the fuck is even happening in this movie?

This movie makes me so sad. David Fincher's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is one of my favourite movies of all time and everything I like from that movie and the others from the Swedish series is gone. Although Claire Foy is good as Lisbeth, she play a different character

that's named Lisbeth but ultimately isn't as interesting as the true Lisbeth (whether you subscribe to Mara, Rapace, or the character from the original books is irrelevant as Foy's character is absolutely not Lisbeth Salander). The Girl in the Spider's Web clearly has an identity crisis. Its title sequence is clearly inspired by 2011 version, its score sounds inspired by its Swedish counterpart, and it relies on previous knowledge of the franchise while retconning the psychology of the characters that had previously been established. Neither its conception or execution makes any sense. It wants to be an action movie and it even fails to be one. Skip this movie.

"The Girl in the Spider's Web" Review

Raymond Thang November 9, 2018
Comment
suspiria_16_427_AB_SUSPIRIA_04_0328_5_EW_Fall_Preview_rgb.0.jpg

"Suspiria” 2018 Review

Luca Guadagnino's "Suspiria" 2018 is a reinterpretation of the Dario Argento 1977 classic. It's darker, grittier, longer, and meaner and it adds a lot to the original premise. Gone is the nightmarish neon lighting and extravagant art direction but what we have instead is a grey, bleak, disgusting looking film that manages to make other horror movies feel like happy-puppy-frolic-times.

We follow Susie (Dakota Johnson) who joins a shady-ass dance academy in Berlin. There's a lot of witch stuff that's going on (btw, you know there're witches, right? Spoilers?). She befriends a girl named Sara (Mia Goth) and there's some crazy dancing and more witch stuff. It's awesome. That's the majority of the film. The other part, which doesn't quite connect with me is the story about an old man investigating the disappearance of one of the girls from the academy. Thematically it makes a lot of sense and the pieces didn't fit for me until hours after the viewing. More on that later.

Huge props go to Damien Jalet's intense, bone-snapping contemporary/expressionist dance choreography with Elena Fokina being a standout in what is probably the most upsetting dance sequence ever put on film. It's also worth noting the Johnson and Goth both do their own dancing and the rest of the dancers on screen are hypnotic to watch in the best possible way. And it's all further enhanced by Walter Fasano's percussive editing and Sayombhu Mukdeeprom's old school 70's era camera work. Mix in some crunchy sound design and a dark ambient/neo-psychedelic score by Thom Yorke and we have ourselves a cool fucking movie.

I didn't think I would like Dakota Johnson when I saw 50 Shades (the first one) and that movie where she's single or whatever. But having seen her in Bad Times at the El Royale and Suspiria, it got me very excited for whatever she does next. Another standout is Mia Goth's super likable Sara. I liked her a lot in "Nymphomaniac" and she was one of the only parts of "A Cure for Wellness" that I liked and she rocks in Suspiria. Of course, something has to be said about Tilda Swinton's performance as three very different characters. It's incredible and Swinton brings a lot of gravitas and empathy to a role like Madame Blanc (one of the dance teachers at the academy) and Dr. Josef Klemperer (which makes those scenes easier to digest).

As much as I love this film, I personally felt lost in a lot of the political context that the film is set in. If only I knew that it was gonna take place in the 1970's in Berlin and deals with vergangenheitsbewältigung, Lufthansa Flight 181, and the RAF terrorist acts, I would've went into it with a better understanding but I suck at history and that's totally shitty on my part. The Dr. Klemperer plot won't make much sense until the very end but watching the set up often felt tedious and less captivating than the stuff that was happening at the dance academy. There's also another woman, played by Małgosia Bela (also playing more than one role) on a bed somewhere far from what's immediately happening and she's awkwardly written into the story and that didn't click for me until I read the Wikipedia article for the movie. That being said, I would totally sit down and watch this again with better context and I totally see myself loving it even more.

Suspiria 2018 is gonna be polarizing. It's a very dense movie and some elements aren't gonna work as well as other parts of the movie. But the parts that do work are enthralling, traumatic, hypnotic, and grotesquely stunning. Don't expect a straightforward retelling of the original.

PS, I guess I should put it out there that I love witches and Radiohead and this film has both of those things. So yay!

"Suspiria" 2018 Review

Raymond Thang November 3, 2018
Comment
AA68_D023_00164RV4.jpg_cmyk_2040.0.jpg

"Halloween” 2018 Review

"Halloween" is the sequel to the first "Halloween" directed by John Carpenter. Not to be confused with its remake directed by Rob Zombie, also titled "Halloween". In short, this is Halloween II but not to be confused with "Halloween II" 1981 and "Halloween II" 2009. This retcons every other Halloween film. Meaning Laurie Strode and Michael Myers are not siblings. The massacre in the first film was random and Laurie Strode has been psychologically preparing for The Shape's return for the last 40 years. I like this premise. I love when old protagonists are revisited and deconstructed -think Luke Skywalker, Wolverine, and Sarah Connor. It's an absolute blast to see Jamie Lee Curtis return to her iconic role as the OG final girl and, in a brilliant way, the once hunted has become the huntress. She's scarred and has a rocky relationship with her daughter and the rest of her family. This is awesome and I wished the movie focused more on that. The other half of the movie is just a dumb slasher about a dude killing a bunch of no names and horny teenagers. If you're into that, then, you're into that. I'm not.

A lot of people think of Horror movies as the dumb teen slasher movie. Movies where characters make dumb decisions that lead to their brutal demise with some cheap (fake) jump scares through in for the shock value. I guess this movie is slightly different because it's partly a comedy with a nonsensical bit about bánh mì shoved into the middle of things. It's a lot tonal whiplash. The characters are dumb and funny and when they get murdered, it's still dumb and funny and suddenly Michael Myers becomes this incomprehensible figure of new aged slapstick. I don't how intentional this was but that's how I felt and people in my theatre also thought it was funny. I honestly don't know what the movie is trying to do most of the time. The original had funny moments, but they were brief and felt organic to the plot. The humour in this movie threw a wrench into its pacing and a lot of it were basically improv'd comedic banter that just kept going for way too long.

There are a lot of callbacks to the original but they're more than simple references, which I enjoyed. Sequences are shot-for-shot references from the original but examined in a new thematic context. And by the time third act rolls around, stakes feel high and the spectacle is great and the sequence is anchored by an incredible performance from Jamie Lee Curti all the way to its somewhat abrupt ending.

I'm not gonna pretend that I like the original Halloween (I'm in the minority that thinks the remake is more enjoyable). I'm also not going to pretend that I like this new Halloween. Most of the movie treads the same ground as its 1978 predecessor and it doesn't really change much of the formula. Just like the original, it's a mediocre horror movie with a nail biting final act. Halloween would be a forgettable teen slasher If it were not called "Halloween".

"Halloween" 2018 Review

Raymond Thang October 20, 2018
Comment
10c3062184ec4d04aea5a8afa45f26d5_31a3e14987ee4e0fb8134d5866706e3c_header.jpeg

"Bad Times at the El Royale” Review

A priest, a back-up singer, a vacuum cleaner salesman, and a hippie walk into a motel... Sounds like a nice set up where anything can and will happen and the things that do happen are really bad. Enter "Bad Times at the El Royale", a neo-noir Tarantino pastiche. But things are more tongue-in-cheek and less dramatic. What if the cocaine baby of "The Hateful Eight" and "Four Rooms" wrote a premise out of madlibs and performed it as an improv bit that stretched on for two hours and twenty minutes? I didn't I wanted that but here it is. The people who are into it are really into it and the people who aren't will not enjoy it. I happen to be the former.

The big thing that stood out to me was Seamus McGarvey's insanely virtuosic cinematography that, in my opinion, eclipses his work in "Atonement". The movie treats us with dense framing, multi-sectional shots and unbroken oners decorated by groovy late 60's art direction accented by tense and methodical editing. Simply put, from a technical perspective, this movie is a masterclass.

We're also graced by an unexpectedly vulnerable performance from Jeff Bridges, the amazing vocal and acting chops of Cynthia Erivo, and a seriously wacky and disturbed Chris Hemsworth all delivering dark witty Drew Goddard dialogue that made me hang on their every word. It also helps that the movie is very unpredictable and provides a lot of laughs and shock value. The main thing that prevents the movie from becoming the next great pulpy crime opus, however, is its unearned and cheap ending especially with the way they treat one specific character. It's very last second and it feels more funny than genuinely moving as was intended. Having had some time to think about it, it feels dirty and left me with a bad taste and sticks out in what is overall a really fun and polarizing and weirdly paced ride.

"Bad Times at the El Royale" Review

Raymond Thang October 14, 2018
Comment
kindergartenteacher_0hero.jpg

"The Kindergarten Teacher" 2018 Review

"The Kindergarten Teacher" (2018) is a remake of the 2014 Israeli film of the same name and it tells the story of an amateur poet/kindergarten teacher played by Maggie Gyllenhaal whom becomes obsessed with a gifted student in her class (Parker Sevak).

What I love about the movie is its unique premise and the way the protagonist is framed in the story. She feel alienated from her family and the most important thing to her is more so about connecting with another person in an intimate way than it is about poetry. On the surface, we see an adult woman doing some really disturbing and creepy things to her student but beneath all that, she's doing it in order to emotionally connect with another person. Although you're not going to agree with most of the things she ends up doing, we get where she's coming from.

I also love the way director Sara Colangelo and cinematographer Pepe Avila del Pino shoot the scenes with the protagonist with her family and at work and how it differs from the intimate framing of her and the boy. Of course, Maggie Gyllenhaal is incredible and gives one of the most empathetic and memorable performances I've ever seen from any actor this entire year. This is one of my favourite performances in recent memory.

Some things that kind of bugged me though is the movie's awkward pacing towards the final 20 minutes of the movie. It's an entire third act that felt rushed and ends abruptly and I wish the movie had taken its time like it did in its first hour -but oh well. Also the performance from Parker Sevak is just serviceable at best. Although, you can argue that that's the nature of his character. Sure, but I still felt really bored watching him.

Very good movie, very empathetic characters and also Maggie Gyllenhaal is amazing.

"The Kindergarten Teacher" 2018 Review

Raymond Thang October 12, 2018
Comment
← NewerOlder →

Search Posts

 

Powered by Squarespace