Change Your Image
H4wke
https://letterboxd.com/H4wke/
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Deer Hunter (1978)
Raw tragedy presented in 3 hours
The Deer Hunter was categorised in my mind as one of the important Vietnam War films. It's really not about Vietnam in particular. Sure, it features the country, the soldiers, the brutality. But the film to me ignores a lot of the politics they easily could have delved into. This is about the effect war has on people.
I was surprised how little warfare was actually in the film. Instead we get a concentrated metaphor in the form of the famous Russian Roulette scene. These cruel betting games historically didn't happen, but it's symbolic of how random warfare can be. This sequence could exist within the frame of any large conflict (as long as revolvers exist).
That part alone is perhaps what the film is mostly remembered for. It's certainly the one aspect I knew about before watching it. I was shocked with how long it actually takes to get to the war. But without that lengthy slice of everyday life, the events in the crucible wouldn't have been nearly as impactful. It's brilliantly done, and the effects ripple throughout the steel mill town.
The film has apparently caught slack for its portrayal of the Vietcong soldiers, which definitely isn't positive. It's completely understandable for people to dislike the film for that. Personally, I don't think the intention was to demonize them, I suspect they're just the unfortunate 'antagonistic force' in again what really could have been a story in any conflict. I may be wrong of course, I haven't looked at any behind the scenes material. Fortunately America's involvement in Vietnam is not looked upon fondly by anyone I know here in New Zealand, and so I went into it with that attitude in mind.
Anyway, how's the actual film? Well - it's slow. I've mentioned there's slice-of-life involved and it works a treat. But it's really not for everyone.
The acting is phenomenal. I expected De Niro and Meryl Streep to be fantastic. I didn't expect Christopher Walken to blow me away. The film is the Deer Hunter, but Walken's character Nick really carries the core message of the film.
The story is heart wrenching, and it's told with stunning visuals that take advantage of the slow pace. Beautiful landscapes both in America and what I have to assume is another Southeast Asian country made to look like Vietnam. Something about older films, where every actor and prop on the screen are really there, just make it feel so much more like a window to another world.
There were unfortunately a few instances with weird cuts that felt like messy editing to me, which did take me out of the film momentarily. And I do think there were some parts that didn't need to be as leisurely as they were.
I'm very glad I watched this film. The runtime was intimidating, the subject matter even more so. But I think it's an important story that really echoes through every major global military conflict up to today.
John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019)
The worst so far, but still a lot of fun.
Yet again, another solid film. Great action sequences (the one in Morocco was a little tiresome, but trained dogs are cool), fun characters, dumb ballistics and a role perfect for Keanu. This does feel like one of those films where they thought of the set pieces and locations first then wormed the plot in later, but it looks so damn good that it doesn't really matter for me.
This is the most visually interesting film in the series so far, the first sequence in particular looked incredible.
The film is a little sillier, I feel the previous one struck the best balance between realism and nonsensical worldbuilding.
Regardless, I'm impressed how consistent the franchise is, but I do think it's nearly worn out its welcome. I'll have to see if the next one does anything new and exciting.
John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
Better in some parts, worse in others. Still, a worthy sequel.
The intro was a little bit worrisome; it acts like you never saw the first film as it rushes through a repeat of the first half of the previous narrative. Fortunately after that we get a more consistent film that builds its world further and ends a lot better than the first.
The physics are pretty ridiculous and unbelievable, yet the fight sequences still manage to feel grounded and authentic thanks to the excellent stunts on display, and very well planned out sequences.
Overall, it's about what I expected from the franchise. A solid follow up that could have easily been much dumber than it was. I'm invested and looking forward to where the third one takes us.
John Wick (2014)
Gun fu at its best
I have yet to see another film that sets up the protagonist as a complete and utter badass before the action even starts.
The film is solid all round, and especially refreshing at the time.
The club sequence in the middle is excellent. I also like the little peeks at the world they clearly were going to build if the film did well (which of course is what ended up happening).
The third act does fail to live up to the rest of the film though.
Overall, a great start to a franchise that I didn't expect to get at least four films out of. I'm not complaining though. Also when will Keanu age, somebody stop this man.
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017)
Stop relying on Jack, the franchise is so much more than him
Dead Men Tell No Tales (a title far superior to Salazar's Revenge) was about as good, and as bad as I expected.
Fortunately the film feels much more connected to the original trilogy which I hold so dear. The only issue is that Jack Sparrow's character is completely flanderized, and by far the worst part of the film. He started off as not the main focus in the first (and best) entry in the series, but has progressively gotten worse and worse. Here, he slurs his words for most of the film, and seems to just get incredibly lucky rather than actually use his hidden intelligence. I suspect that they're trying to make him out to be a shadow of what he once was. I just think it's not clear enough and could have been executed better.
Fortunately the new side characters breathe a little bit of life into the franchise. The sets and character designs (especially for the villains) are visually interesting, and help reinforce the quasi-mythology that Dead Man's Chest and At World's End set up so well. Salazar himself is actually intimidating for the first half of the film, before he gets stuck in a weird loop saying 'Sparrow'. And the leitmotifs make a lot more sense in this film than On Stranger Tides.
Still, Dead Men Tell No Tales is a shadow of what once was a fresh and exciting franchise. Fortunately it does try to actually be something different, and as a result doesn't really ruin the world for me.
Just fix Sparrow or get rid of him entirely. There's still interesting stories to be told here, stop relying on a tired character.
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)
Weirdly disconnected; depressingly dull
I hadn't seen this one since the theatres, and it's no surprise why I'd forgotten 95% of the film. It's... fine.
I think there's a lot of neat concepts here that were really good ideas at the time. It's just that the scenes feel undercooked. The plot points are serviceable, but the dialogue needs spicing up; the flair of the Verbinski films is barely there - both the convoluted stories and the creepy distinctive worldbuilding.
One of the highlights of the trilogy was the recurring side characters. Even if they didn't have their own subplots, it was nice to have some consistency. Instead we're left with just three characters (four if you count the monkey) that we know. And that's fine, if the new ones were memorable in any way. To be fair, Blackbeard himself is pretty fun, but it does feel like Ian McShane-lite after seeing Deadwood.
The high production quality is still there at least. There's no dated CGI, and the sets are quite impressive. A few towards the start are especially complex, and quite promising at the time.
Jack Sparrow fortunately was less dopey than I remember. There are a few scenes that really stretch believability, even in the world of Pirate-physics, but there are a few scenes that still suggest he really is quite intelligent underneath it all.
The soundtrack is the first in the series to disappoint me. It really feels like Zimmer phoned in this one. He reuses themes that were associated with in-world aspects in the original trilogy that just aren't in this film, and it comes off as lazy to me.
He does introduce more strings into the soundtrack, to give it that Spanish touch, but it's just not enough.
And Spain is actually an important thing in the franchise finally, but again they're undercooked and serve as basic plot-points, nothing more. I want to see Spanish ships in combat!
So I'm left pretty underwhelmed by this fourth entry. The world feels stale, and lifeless without the quasi-mythology that the second and third films set up pretty well. The fountain of youth could have been a lot more interesting, and beautiful monster-women that lure sailors are 2800 years out of style.
It's a shame, as I do really like those first three films a lot. They're ridiculous and get a lot of flak, but at least they're visually interesting and fully commit to themselves.
On Stranger Tides fails to live up to the title, and the films that came before.
Mars Attacks! (1996)
Absolutely ridiculous in the best way
A fantastic homage to films of the 50s and 60s, I just have trouble figuring out what parts are intentionally bad, and what parts are just bad.
I do think it's ultimately overstuffed. Too many characters with arcs that go nowhere. But at the same time the film is so nonsensical, and the actors are so committed to the absurdity that I can't help but like it overall. Has Jack Black ever not given one hundred percent to a role.
The head swapping did really freak me out as a kid though, and I hadn't rewatched it till now because of it. This time around, it was pretty funny. Is this what growing up is?
Paddington 2 (2017)
Somehow one of the best films of the decade.
I think there's some deep love I have for Paddington hidden away in my subconscious. I don't remember reading any of the stories. But my mum says I was brought up on them, and Winnie the Pooh, and Thomas the Tank Engine; Calvin and Hobbes as well of course. For now, forget all them. I love this movie.
I love it so much that the worst part about the film is trying to convince people to watch it. Yes it's a kids film, are you scared of not being an adult for an hour and a half?
This is the first time I've rewatched it in years, and I finally convinced a friend to watch it (who quite liked it, because it's impossible to hate). All it took was both of us creating a list of films and using a random-number-generator, then getting very lucky.
This film is of course part of the BCU (British Cinematic Universe) so naturally a bunch of Harry Potter actors are in it, who are all splendid.
I have to say that Hugh Grant is never better than in this film. I haven't really seen much of his work, but this film made me an instant fan of his. It's an outstanding performance in a role that was quite literally made for him. Ben Whishaw has to be commended as well; perfect casting as Paddington.
The film recreates the wonderful realizations every 25 or so minutes that the bear isn't actually real. It's impressive how seamlessly the actors react to Paddington - he truly feels like he's there.
Of course you do have to surrender to the film's internal logic. Talking bears exist - there's supposedly only one in London - most people are completely nonplussed about it. I can understand more literal people not buying into that, and it's fine. Well, truthfully it's a shame, but it's fine. It's fine.
The film's production value is excellent. The creativity continues from the first film, with sequences that they really did not need to go all out in (but I'm so glad they did). A pop-up book where characters walk through, pages turning and all. Timelapses with rotating cameras to show Paddington's aura working its magic. Scenes in a weird prison that escaped a Wes Anderson film.
These elevate the story, a story which trusts the viewer more than the prequel with its build-ups and pay-offs. As a result the film does start off a bit slower, with things that seem quirky but pretty inconsequential. But the final act comes, and the dominoes fall; the ending particularly is wonderful.
There is only one loose end really, with one character that only serves as an obstacle for the characters. Maybe the upcoming sequel will do something interesting with them? I hope so, the actor is a favourite of mine. You may be wondering, Who? In the capitilisation lies your answer friend.
A strength of both these films is viewing the world through the lens of Paddington. He's so naïve and devoid of malice, it's incredibly endearing. We've all been children before (I assume; I hope), but even children are prone to outbursts and icky negative emotions. Paddington is pure, and he improves the lives of everyone around him. It's a joyous outlook on the chaotic, senseless world that we're in. I suppose that's why the film is so comforting.
It's nice that Paddington got two excellent films. It's amazing that the sequel is even better than the first. I feel like this will genuinely be regarded as a classic in a few decades, the ending still hits just as hard on a rewatch. I really wonder what the third film will be like, since Paul King is doing Wonka (which I wouldn't be excited about if he wasn't directing).
So the sequel to the talking bear children's movie is one of my favourite films of all time. I really didn't expect that going into it.
Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)
Hopefully the start of a film franchise
My entire experience with Dungeons and Dragons is waiting 2 hours for our dungeon master friend to set up a session, and then playing it for half an hour while the thriving-on-chaos friend did his best to die at every possible turn (we were 15). Suffice to say, the only reason I convinced my brother to go to the theatres and watch this with me was the directors previous film Game Night being as good as it was.
So the only references I really got were the name-drops (Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights and Icewind Dale are games I know of, but have barely played). But to be honest, this knowledge was pretty irrelevant. You don't need any prior knowledge of Dungeons and Dragons to enjoy the film, just an appreciation for adventure stories and fun humour really.
Though having said that, certain jokes will work better if you know what they're referring to - admittedly I didn't get some of them till reading discussions afterwards, the Paladin being a major one).
What I did enjoy was the production value. The actors are all proven talent, and they performed well (as expected) but the way the film was shot really elevated the story. One long chase sequence was particularly exciting. The practical effects on display throughout the film were awesome as well, and will no doubt help the film hold up decades from now. This film channels the same energy as Princess Bride, Stardust and the first three Pirates films.
Now my brother and I have played newer games that are similar to old school RPGs based on DnD rules. Divinity Original Sin especially. These games are very open-ended, and there's a plethora of ways to approach most situations. Why approach this battle head-on when you can throw a teleporter stone behind the enemy before engaging and backstab them? Why not sneak into this room by throwing explosive barrels at the door instead of picking the lock? Maybe spy on those enemies by turning into a cat?
I'm pointing this out because my favourite part of the film was the way the characters basically went into everything with such a mindset. They get around supposed barriers with logic that befits people trying to cheat the system, and it's glorious.
I really hope this starts a franchise, I've already downloaded Baldur's Gate to play with my brother. I've researched into what books to read that are set in the universe this film uses. I've considered that DnD might not always be one player trying to ruin the experience for everyone else because they think it's nerdy. That's progress, people.
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
The worst of the trilogy, but still incredibly fun
The climax of the Pirates Trilogy takes off the shackles and truly shows what it's been all along: a bloated, exciting, dumb, gloriously epic fantasy adventure.
At World's End is the worst in the trilogy. That first half is pretty rough; scenes tend to drag a fair amount. Too many characters and MacGuffins are introduced that should really have been hinted at in Dead Man's Chest (they were filmed together, no excuse). But the climax is truly epic. Silly and over-the-top of course, but when were these movies ever not?
It's easy to see how this was the most expensive film ever at the time, to be topped 4 years later by On Stranger Tides (proof that more money doesn't always ensure greater happiness).
I do feel like the plot centers a bit too much on Jack Sparrow here. He works as part of the stories, not the whole. He's still mostly a delight at least, and having Keith Richards play his father was brilliant.
I did actually enjoy the interactions between Davy Jones and the British Empire a lot more as an adult. As a kid I think I regarded it more as parts-to-daydream-during but now the clash of order and chaos is quite enticing. I like that the film only shows parts of events sometimes as well, it makes the world feel more alive.
And this has my favourite soundtrack in the whole trilogy. 'Up is Down' in particular is excellent, Hans Zimmer did a wonderful job here.
So it's the worst film of the three, but the final half is a very satisfying end to the story. I was anxious before I saw this, I didn't actually remember half of the film from when I was a child. It holds up, I wish Disney still put out stuff as gritty and grounded (poor choice of word) as this trilogy was.
Now I sail onto On Stranger Tides, of which I saw once in theatres in 2011 and decided it wasn't worth rewatching. Of course, I've remembered the decision not to rewatch, but not any of the film itself. The completionist part of my brain is clashing with 15-year-old me, and I suspect the latter might be more prudent.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
Visually incredible to this day
Close Encounters has been a film I've been meaning to see for years and years - finally I've seen what all the fuss is about.
Having heard about this film for ages as one of the best sci-fi films of all time, my expectations were appropriately sky high.
And it was fine. Amazing for the time, no doubt. The spectacle on display particularly for 1977 is incredibly impressive. The film is marvelous at building suspense, and Spielberg once more shows his expertise at moving the camera.
But, I was a bit disappointed by the character writing here. Roy Neary is an obvious analogue for Spielberg and his obsession with filmmaking. That's certainly a nice personal connection to the film. But Roy (and especially his wife) are quite frankly unlikable. It felt like the plot was too focused on this analogue; the ending did not make much sense to me (not so much the events themselves, but the reasoning behind decisions of the characters and aliens). His children are also presented in a negative light. But their acting out is within reason.
I also felt that the aliens themselves were rather uninteresting, besides their unique form of communication that fortunately puts John Williams on a pedestal. I get that the film's emotional core isn't really about them so much, but still, it would have been nice.
But that's enough negatives. The film was well acted, and there are some great sequences with practical effects all through the story. I did enjoy it overall and can see how influential it was, even if Star Wars did release in the same year. Overall, I'm glad I finally took the time to watch it.
Jaws (1975)
Absolutely iconic
The last time I saw Jaws, I was far too young. My grandma bought me the DVD at the mall next to my piano lessons (and Jaws 2 but let's not talk about that) and the film was a favourite for me at the time. Since I was about 10 or 11 though, I haven't rewatched it. I think the fingernails on the blackboard scared me off, that sound is absolutely hideous to me. It's a silly reason of course, but I always had it in my mind that 'I know Jaws is a good film, there's no pressing need to rewatch it'.
Well, I rewatched it. Jaws is better than I remembered. Far better.
I've heard Jaws described as a perfect film. It might just be.
Every camera movement feels so perfect. It's got an incredible balance of scares, laughs, tension, levity. The music is iconic. The characters are interesting. The shark is terrifying.
Jaws is so good that the only problem I have with the film is the misrepresentation of sharks. So much so that Spielberg and the writer of the book Peter Benchley greatly regretted the damage they think they did to the public perception of sharks. In my mind it's not entirely their fault. It's a work of fiction and people shouldn't get their facts from such a work of art. But people are stupid. Just look at the mayor dealing with the shark like a lot of leaders dealt with Covid. Very poorly. We have a summer to enjoy people!
I don't think the film is necessarily harmed if normal sharks aren't shown as deadly man-hunting creatures in the first place; show that Bruce (the big shark) or sharks in general attacking people is not normal at all. Quint's character arc would still make sense. The events of the USS Indianapolis described in the film did actually happen.
Yes, I realise I'm talking about editing a screenplay of a 'perfect' movie. I never said I wasn't one of those stupid people.
So Jaws is possibly the largest leap in enjoyment from when I watched it as a child. I think it's because I loved the characters so much now, whereas before I was only really there for the cool shark moments. I also can't believe that I remembered a particularly scary part, one second after it happened. Thanks brain.
I do wonder if this film helped my fear of swimming in open ocean. I used to think it was the 3D space existing that I couldn't see, with who knows what underneath. Maybe it was specifically a big great white. Legs dangling over the great abyss.
I do remember a moment at a beach I was camping nearby once in the North Island of New Zealand. We were walking down the road towards it when in the distance we saw people evacuating the waves. My friends' dad lent us his polarised sunglasses, and there it was. A shadow in the water, making its way horizontally along the rising waves. A shortfin mako had visited the beach, where I had swum far out three times already that week. I was more terrified than necessary, possibly because of Jaws. Nobody was harmed of course, sharks are scary, but no shark is as scary as Bruce.
The Sugarland Express (1974)
A bit of a let down compared to Duel and Jaws
I'd never heard of this film before I decided to watch of Spielberg's films.
It has the unfortunate disadvantage of being sandwiched between Duel and Jaws. And, honestly, I didn't enjoy it as much as I'd hoped I would.
The main couple are insufferable, and the cops seem too incompetent to be believable. The film is quite funny at times though, it reminded me a lot of Raising Arizona (a film I much prefer to this) and it's shot very well. Spielberg knows how to move the camera.
It's just the core plot elements didn't work for me, and the end result was a painfully average viewing experience.
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
The most interesting of the trilogy
Dead Man's Chest is one of those sequels that goes for 'more everything', and it mostly works. It really feels like Disney turned a blind eye for this film and At World's End.
What these sequels do so well is embellish our history with the mythology of the times. This is a fantasy land; Davy Jones is a real octopus man with the kraken under his command, people can be resurrected and humans in servitude can be encrusted on the wall like barnacles if they're on a ship too long. And what makes it compelling is that 'our world' still exists. The British Navy is clashing with these fantastical elements-the end result is surprisingly grounded as a result. Or rather, it would be if Jack Sparrow didn't exist. Yes, he's back and sillier than the original film-but it's at least tolerable here. I love that Will Turner, the more standard protagonist of adventure films of the past is just fighting in the background half the time, as if the normal adventure film is happening, but hey look at this more interesting thing (Jacks' antics) instead.
A third of this film doesn't really need to exist. The whole island sequence especially is silly, unnecessary, physics-breaking, nonsensical and dumb. I love it. This universe has its own laws of thermodynamics and physics. Once you accept that, this franchise (or at least the first three films) are so much fun.
I will say though, that the special effects are such a jump from the first film. Some of the CGI of the Flying Dutchmans' crew is just fine, and doesn't look too great in daylight. But Davy Jones looked phenomenal at the time, and is still pretty impressive today. Bill Nighy is fantastically threatening once he eventually shows up an hour into the runtime.
Despite the "bloat" of that first hour, Jones and the Kraken are built up incredibly well. I remember as a kid being super excited for either of them whenever I rewatched the film.
So Dead Man's Chest is a lot of fun, and more interesting than Curse of the Black Pearl. It's definitely messier but the worldbuilding resonates with me more. I was actually pretty surprised how well the film holds up. The pirates franchise isn't remembered as much by me and my friends-probably because of the fourth and fifth films being what they were-so it was especially nice being able to enjoy at least the first two thirds of the original trilogy again. I'm really curious to see if I'll enjoy At World's End, having not seen it since I was a kid. I remember it being messier and bloated but quite epic at the same time, so we'll see.
Knock at the Cabin (2023)
Great direction of a confusing script.
I'm a big M Night fan, probably because I haven't seen his run from Lady in the Water to After Earth. This film was one of his 'ok' ones.
Firstly, Dave Bautista is excellent here. I'd never seen Ben Aldridge in anything before, and he really impressed me here. All the acting was on point really. The movie is also shot very well. The film takes place in one location primarily, and it never feels boring.
My problem lies with the screenplay. I don't have much of a problem with the dialogue being kind of weird most of the time. It's more that the first half sets up a great conflict, then the film doesn't really go anywhere surprising. There are some interesting themes mixed in, and questions about senses of morality that should be explored more within the short runtime, but the ending just really confuses me. I'm trying to make sense of it, and maybe that's what Shyamalan intended, but it's not presented in a way where this seems to be the case.
So I'm conflicted. I enjoyed watching it, but that ending drags the whole experience down a touch.
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
Disney brings Princess Bride energy to the seas
This is the Pirates film that I watched the least of the three as a kid. I only ever watched it when I could borrow my friends' DVD copy of it, and it wasn't accessible to me at all times like the two direct sequels were.
So I do have less of an attachment to this film, but I think at an objective level it is the best in the series. Curse of the Black Pearl manages to channel that old Errol Flynn, Princess Bride energy but spices things up a bit with the lightning-in-a-bottle that is Jack Sparrow.
Johnny Depp really elevates the film, and his intelligence hidden under a drunk, Keith Richards persona is a joy to watch, before he gets unfortunately Flanderized movie-by-movie.
So while this may be the best entry in the franchise (the screenplay is very efficient and fun), I think I do prefer the sequels. Whether or not it's nostalgia working its wicked ways, or the fact that the sequels have more elements that I find interesting is up for debate.
The only part I feel that hasn't aged well is the full-body CGI of the skeleton men. They knew their limits with actors not crossing greenscreen backgrounds, but the undead pirates don't look all that great excepting a few notable moments. Maybe because post production was pre-Gollum?
But regardless, the movie (and series, really) is one I'm overall fond for. I'm honestly quite surprised that it's made by Disney; parts in it are pretty grisly, gritty and grotesque.
Paddington (2014)
Absolutely delightful
I'll forever be saying 'It's more than a kids movie, trust me it's fantastic'.
I watched this for the first time last year - it reached down into my memories, pulled out the Paddington nostalgia embedded in my hippocampus and gently, politely even, smeared the dopamine around my brain. This film was so much better than I expected it to be.
I admit, I heard the acclaim surrounding Paddington 2. I saw the reviews. I read the Reddit posts. 'Yes, it's a kids movie'. 'Yes, it's amazing'. 'The first one isn't as good though, you'll have to get through that'.
What? Who dares suggest that first Paddington film is a necessary burden to get through to the second film?
I love this movie.
While the story is relatively simple, and requires you believe that a stray bear in human society is no reason for alarm, the execution elevates this movie to one of my favourites of the last few years. In fact this London is quite different. It's idealistic, welcoming; there's bearly any prejudice, less grizzly people and, naturally, a seductive taxidermist.
The characters are all brimming with life though, and it's a treat seeing so many Harry Potter actors in the same movie again.
Paddington himself is amazingly realised. It was only after the movie that I found myself remembering that Paddington wasn't actually a real bear. The CGI, interactions and voice acting are so well done that I completely forgot he was fake.
The execution as well is fantastic. An doll house opens as a cross section showing the different rooms of the real house Paddington is staying at. The old explorer finding Paddington's relatives is shown in an old film format. There's jokes that are set up at the start of the film to pay off much later on. It's just very well crafted, and though it's whimsical and idealistic, it doesn't treat the viewer like an idiot.
So if you haven't given this film a go, I unabashedly recommend it. I got two of my cousins and my younger brother to watch it - trepidatious as they were - and they loved it.
Kidô senshi Gandamu III: Meguriai sorahen (1982)
This is the movie that warrants the 'dam' in the franchise title.
Encounters in Space (bad name, but whatever) feels like an actual film much more than the other two entries. Perhaps because it *is* originally designed as an ending; it doesn't feel weirdly truncated like the prequels.
This entry also has by far the best animation of the three. The writing has been epic before, but here the visuals live up what was promised.
The level of brutality on display is also more in line with what's happening in the story, and a few of the deaths were quite impactful.
I'm moving onto Zeta Gundam now (the show, not the films this time) and am very excited to see where the franchise goes. This trilogy was a great foundation for a hopefully expansive universe.
Kidô senshi Gandamu II: Ai senshihen (1981)
Gundam continues being a solid 'show'.
I'm definitely invested in this universe now. It weirdly feels nostalgic watching this, as if Transformers/Scooby-Doo/Dragon Ball primed me for a linear, serious story with the same quirks of the era.
The pacing is a little odd, but it's TV episodes meshed together so I'll let it slide once again. I'm enjoying where the characters seem to be going. There's some interesting developments that add depth and mystery to their motivations, and side characters like Kai really blossom here.
I can't believe there's only one more film left to cover the original story. Fortunately I'll be watching two shows afterwards and Char's Counterattack. Beyond that, who's to say? Lots of room for stories in space.
Kidô senshi Gandamu (1981)
A great introduction to Gundam
Of course the big negative of this film is that I'm now hooked into the Gundam universe. I have set time aside, quit my job and cancelled all social plans.
I have no idea why I thought Gundam was like Power Rangers. It's not really a big thing here in New Zealand, at least from the 90s onwards. So my perception is pretty skewed I suppose. This is a pretty dark and dreary war-torn universe that happens to have young people as the protagonists.
This first film was a solid start. It's dated, but if you grew up watching old Hannah Barbara cartoons like I did, it's actually pretty well animated. You have to go in knowing the nature of the original film trilogy: it's a series abridged and because of this the pacing is kind of weird. Basically, it's episodes stitched together, with 'filler' removed and improved animation. I liked it a fair bit. There's actually some gorgeous matte paintings to be found throughout, and the shot composition keeps things visually interesting. There's also none of the anime tropes that I find annoying (those tend to permeate through 2000s-2010s shows). So, a lot of positives. I think due to the shortening, some side characters that presumably got a lot of mundane things to do aren't developed as well as they could have been. The pacing is still rather slow, though I don't mind that so much. And, it does end on a note that doesn't seem incredibly impactful.
Overall this was a great first Gundam experience, and every second I watched improved that one moment in Ready Player One.
Top Gun (1986)
Lives up to its cheesy reputation.
Somehow I hadn't seen this until now. Though I knew a decent amount of the plot points, and the music is obviously iconic.
Overall, it was fine. The plane sequences have aged very well. The relationship sequences haven't. It does get the label from me (and presumably many others) of 'the most 80s movie that ever existed'. So it's got that going for it.
I think if I cared about planes more I'd like it. It's also frustrating how Iceman is portrayed as being wrong when he was just trying to be responsible. Oh well.
I'm mostly watching it so I can see the sequel, which I've heard so many good things about.
Wind River (2017)
Absolutely chilling
I've seen Sicario a few times now, and admire the writing more each time. After having only seen that, and the success of the Yellowstoneverse, I decided to check out Sheridan's other projects.
I have to say, Wind River was excellent.
One could argue that there could be more Native American representation, I personally don't know enough about the situation to argue either way. But the film does a great job at raising awareness towards their plights, and for that I have to commend it. It helps that it's a damn good film, the way tension is handled in the final third is something I hope to replicate in any creative endeavours I go on. There's one moment where a line of dialogue expertly delivered completely changes the tone of the scene. I went back and rewatched it a few times. Chilling.
The soundtrack by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is incredibly atmospheric, and helps give a True Detective-like atmosphere to the story.
It's also nice seeing Hawkeye and Scarlet Witch act.
La jetée (1962)
A portal to the past
I remember watching this in Media Studies back when I was fifteen.
First, let's get the joke out of the way. It was the best PowerPoint our teacher showed us. Moving on.
I have similar feelings towards it as I did then. La Jetée is creepy as all hell; the German whispering throughout is seriously unnerving, and does more than half a usual film's runtime could ever hope to achieve.
There's something about the story being told in pictures that makes it feel so authentic. These snapshots act as memories, parts of a greater whole. It's only the most personal moments-like the one, beautiful portion of actual video in the entire film-that stay as intact as possible in our minds. That one moment is what grounds everything before and after. For one brief portion of time, the world was, is, real; other memories fade slower because of it.
I remember the computer I watched this film on, in a class that undoubtedly wasn't photographed at the time. Our teacher interestingly made us watch it with headphones. Perhaps that's why the audio creeps me out to this day.
We watched 12 Monkeys (which this film heavily inspired) afterwards of course, the film we were actually studying at the time. But it was on a projector, over several days. I liked 12 Monkeys more at the time (it really is fantastic), however La Jetée is what really stuck with me after all these years. It's the one thing I remember really well from the class in that particular year. I wonder if that moment of time exists for any of the other students going through a weird French PowerPoint, or maybe for the teacher handing it out on USBs for the fourth year in a row. I suspect it doesn't.
Jurassic World (2015)
Just... so... dumb...
I haven't really watched this since it first came out on Blu-ray. Man oh man what a disappointment.
I do remember liking Jurassic World in cinemas. I would have been 18 at the time, and somehow dumber than I am now.
Don't get me wrong, there are some neat parts to this entry.
The T-Rex being back is great. Fan service, yes, but great. There's a few great action shots, and the production value is adequate for the time. They weirdly use CGI for parts that could easily be practical (Velociraptor heads in the peculiar wall muzzles), so it's definitely not aged as well. But, it's serviceable.
The Indominus Rex design is actually pretty solid, and the concept of them experimenting with genetics to make more crowd-pleasers is a believably natural evolution in the 'scientist-playing-god' area the series started off in. The concept of training raptors, is pretty good. The concept of the park re-opening is also: good.
But the reasoning is dumb.
Re-opening the park when they're clearly not prepared is dumb. These are massive deadly creatures, why is there no contingencies? Why is the 8th richest man in the world scared about losing a few million dollars worth over people's lives and the park closing down completely?
Training raptors for the military is dumb. Do the script writers even understand modern warfare? What do they do better than modern tech? Dogs can smell incredibly well. Raptors? They can run fast I guess?
The Indominus Rex being made because people 'find dinosaurs boring' is-you guessed it-dumb. We can see the park filled with the crowd going insane over these creatures. And sure, the characters might just be dumb. But they're not really presented as such. Surely they could come up with a better reason to play with genetics. And yes, I'm aware 'dumb' is too prevalent in the review, but it was prevalent in the film too, and I had to sit through it.
But hey, maybe the characters redeem the plot?
Chris Pratt plays... Chris Pratt.
Bryce Dallas Howard has the most complete arc, and I didn't mind her character so much. But, I don't even remember her name. That first film I remember all the characters, even Dr Wu. He's in the first film for like, 2 minutes. The kids do a decent job, but again it's hard to believe the older kid not being interested in dinosaurs. Is there other parks on the mainland they've been exposed to? And the subplot around their parents is rather odd. Couldn't they learn from Jurassic Park III that nobody really cares about divorce in their dinosaur sci-fi movies.
Just, talk about the morals and ethics of the park. It's open and working; there's so much to explore.
I really wish I liked this movie more. But I think it's dumb. Lots of bizarre writing choices for a convoluted script make it hard for me to enjoy. And the problem is, I remember liking Fallen Kingdom even less. Me and my friend are watching through the series slowly, and I am absolutely dreading the next entry. But hey, maybe its smaller scale narrative will be better on a rewatch? Maybe one day I'll get over the fact that none of the Jurassic Park sequels get close to the quality of that glorious first film. Though, as I've said before, perhaps it's apt that they never match the original.
Jurassic Park III (2001)
The best character returns for a pretty fun action film
Yet another pale shadow of the first film, but I actually like this one slightly more than The Lost World.
This film knows what it is. It's a monster movie set in the JP universe, and it doesn't overstay its welcome like the last entry.
Sure, it's an uglier film. The saturation is weirdly toned down, and the action isn't shot at the Spielberg level (though, can't really blame them much). But, there's some fantastic sequences in here. The Spinosaurus entry scene on the runway is as exciting as when I saw it as a kid. And the aviary section is one of the best parts in the entire franchise as far as I'm concerned.
I just love the run-down aesthetic of the park, it's something that the Jurassic World trilogy barely touches on.
It also helps that Alan Grant, unlike Ian Malcolm, actually feels like the same character in his sequel film.
And that Spinosaurus animatronic is very, very impressive.
Is it weird that this is my favourite JP sequel? Jurassic World was too convoluted and crowd-pleasing. I don't even care about the velociraptor dream. It's a dream. It's silly, but not as silly as the gymnastic kick as far as I'm concerned.
At least they tried something different.