Change Your Image
jakethesandbag
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
A Cure for Wellness (2016)
Overwhelmingly beautiful cinematography, crazy fun B-Move storyline
A Cure for Wellness, Gore Verbinki's latest film foray, is a divisive one. This film will leave it's audiences polarized. I, for one, was ready to call it my favorite guilty pleasure film of the year so far. The performances are enticing and mysterious; the cinematography is comparable to some of Kubrick's best; the story is reminiscent of classical gothic stories, with hints of vampirical/immortality thematics; and a darker shadow always seems to be leaking beneath the surface of everything going on. Those reasons alone, for me, account for the first 90% of this film being incredibly enjoyable. HOWEVER, a word of warning to the wise: this film had a clear ending, something cynical and dark in nature, an ending that I was rooting for... and then it continued on for another 20 minutes, and ended in a horrendous array of lunacy. So, despite this being my recommendation, know that the ending could potentially ruin the experience for you.
Amanda Knox (2016)
Divisive, intriguing true crime story
The Amanda Knox story is, historically, a very divisive crime story, and the public opinion that has become enveloped in the "truth" has evolved to relatively toxic sides. Either you think she is innocent, or she is guilty. But as one of the first lines spoken in this masterful documentary presents, from Knox herself: Either she is a psychopath in sheep's clothing, or she is you. And both are equally terrifying. This incredible dichotomy of a revelation is expertly told and discovered in the Netflix-original documentary, that is engrossing to the last second. The editing, the cinematography, and the interviews of some of the key players of the crime are all must-sees.
Elle (2016)
Verhoeven is back, and he has been dearly missed
Paul Verhoeven's work is often divisive, technical, and precise. At his best, he defines a genre with satirical flairs and constant energy (Robocop or Starship Troopers). At his worst, you still can't look away from his perfected masterclass of directing chaos (looking at you ShowGirls). With Elle each disturbing step that Verhoeven pushes his audience towards leaves you pale and frightened. It is an unsettling revenge thriller that needs to be seen, with an incredible performance from Isabelle Huppert, and a complimenting precision from Verhoeven behind the camera.
Everybody Wants Some!! (2016)
Kinetic blast
Richard Linklater's spiritual sequel to Dazed and Confused is kinetic, funny, relatable, beautiful, and poetic in all the ways that his best films can be. Where some of his films meander, this film is focused. I love it.
La La Land (2016)
Beautiful, calming, and surprisingly tragic
Damien Chazelle returns to the filmmaking foray with a beautiful, calming, and surprisingly sad portrayal of aspirations and ideals in the cutthroat world of Los Angeles. Anyone who has had a passion or pursuit in some form or another will connect to this film immediately, and the musical nature of the film only helps keep the fluidity moving.
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)
Fun, albeit dumb, experience
Admittedly, I am not a large Guy Ritchie fan. I find his directorial efforts to be an editor's dream - playing around with non-linear storytelling, with quick-cuts, hacked up scenes; often at the cost of mediocre stories held up by style rather than substance. At his best, he offers intelligent, witty, funny, and fast films, of the likes of Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. At his worst, the mundanity of the story is only held up by the style of his filmmaking persona (looking at you, Sherlock Holmes series). Altogether, his films aren't necessarily bad, but are completely dependable on Ritchie's concise focus and attention to his style. He is certainly not the only, nor most notable director, to do this. Delving briefly in to the ol' auteur theory of cinema, I find it to be very tiring and lackluster for a director/writer/actor/cinematographer/etc. to constantly rehash their same style, to the point of not being able to create something new.
All of that being said, Guy Ritchie's adaptation of the classic fantasy fable, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is an excellently crafted, enjoyable, fun, and thrilling action adventure.
To be frank, this film was an entire surprise to me. If you are at all familiar with Ritchie's fast-paced aesthetic and intricate way of crafting scenes, it was a surprising breath of fresh air to see his approach in such a high-budget fantasy film in this day age.
All too often, films of this ilk in our modern "tentpole blockbuster cinema" era are mild, dim, and simplistic. This is done so as not to offend any possible moviegoer. Characters and story structure are often poorly written, and dialogue sounds as if it was meant only for the trailer. Actors can be one-note, direction uninspired, and filmmaking techniques come down to the most basic of high-school setups. There becomes nothing tangible to remember from those two-hours that your sat in the theater.
Fortunately, with King Arthur, audiences can be treated to a respectable, efficient, and exciting fantasy adventure.
Legend of the Sword is a traditional retread of the classic fantasy tale - Arthur is child of King Uther. But after a coup and betrayal from Uther's brother, Vortigern, Arthur is abandoned to a nearby village, and Vortigern takes the throne of Britain. As he grows older, fate is thrown to Arthur, and he must fight to retake his throne to restore balance in the kingdom. Toss in some mages, magic, giant elephants from a dark-realm, and a sword locked in stone belonging to the true king of Britain, and you have the basic constructs of King Arthur.
First and foremost, the screenplay is strict and tight. Dialogue has purpose, characters have goals, and all of them twist and turn around each other in a classic "hero's journey"-esque way. Furthermore, for how simplistic everything is, it all feels rooted in the reality of the story world presented - all actions are motivated, and there are consequences to every action. Everyone serves a point and purpose in getting us from A to B, but it's what happens between those points that define our characters. Some of this may seem pretty basic, especially when it comes down to action/adventure films. These necessary beats (first act has an unwilling character, second act finds them interested but defeated, third act has the climax and resolve, etc.) are so engrained in our culture because of literary classics, that we have come to expect them, simply because we have seen them time and time again.
With Guy Ritchie, however, we get a fresh eye and approach to this traditional tale. Having him tell a classic through his viewpoint makes his adaptation much more like an eccentric bard recounting the tale. Witty dialogue from well-thought out characters; charismatic and enthralling performances from the whole cast; beautiful dramatic cues; intense and well-choreographed action sequences. All of this is compacted into this fairly average, classic story, and it suddenly feels fresh. His sense of filmmaking is at it's peak in this film, with perfectly executed shots (reminiscent of glorious, classical renaissance art) and meticulous editing. His score and music also help compliment every moment, most notably an epic use of the song Lament by Light of Aidan near the start of the film.
Now, as I mentioned above, I tend to have a sort of grievance with auteur filmmakers. I often feel that it is somewhat of a cop-out to repeat and barely improve on your past skills as an artist, rather than attempt to learn more about yourself and create something new. However, when a filmmaker is willing to leave their comfort zone, and either A.) Try a new story format with their traditional filmmaking techniques, OR, B.) Try new techniques all across the board, I tend to find more respect for them. By safe-guarding your style, you can only grow in that style, and I find that to be boring. Now, there is also the issue of auteurs being thrust into something, and not allowing them to perform their style. Case in point, when Warner Bros. wants to hire an "edgy" director to make Suicide Squad they choose excellent filmmaker David Ayer. However, as they want to produce something that is more appropriate for all audiences, and follows your more average storyline of other superhero films out, they begin to suppress down on all creative control he/she might have. So auteurs are chosen for their style, and then not allowed to practice it in production.
A bit of an auteur theory rant (ramble?) here, but my point really comes down to this: As a filmmaker, you should have complete control of your approach to your film. When that control is threatened and not collaborative, your risk the integrity of your work. When you decide to cycle/rinse/repeat your own safeguards, you risk not being innovative, and being completely repetitive.
For Ritchie, I feel that King Arthur: Legend of the Sword was a more streamlined and traditional story for him, when compared to his more sporadic, energetic tales. With his unique branding and approach, however, he helped revive it to feel more alive and fun. Albeit dependent at times on his style to make it energetic, the overall experience is like your classic fantasy tale would be: good versus evil, and tons of awesome violence in between.
Hereditary (2018)
Truly truly the next great horror film
I almost want to preface this with "Don't watch the trailer." I went into 'Hereditary' completely blind - I had only heard of the buzz it was getting (stereotypical critic buzzword write-ups like "The New Exorcist," or "Scarier than The Exorcist" or "This generations' Exorcist" - like, WE GET IT, "The Exorcist" was great), and I had also seen the poster, which is vague as hell. The only other insight I had into this movie was from a phone call with a friend of mine, another horror-film fanatic, who said that the trailer depicted a chaotic, insane, terrifying film. That's all the preparation I had for this movie, and ultimately, that's all I needed. Because in the end, I had no clue what I was going into. It's a bold statement to say that this is the best horror film in decades, because not only have there been very great horror films over the last few years - but it's easily there for me (maybe the Conjuring...). It's scary, yes, but there are little to no jump scares - instead, there is some of the most disturbing imagery I have ever seen. There is drama, there is humor, there is campy-B-Movie tropes. Yet, this potluck of a film is perfectly executed. It's remarkably directed, written, performed, shot, and composed. Every arc has a perfect little bow-tie; every reveal or twist is not gimmicky, but rather fulfilling and grandly alters the film before it. I fear that going on about it, or setting any expectations here on out, would be removing you of the setting I had for this - little to nothing. Go in to it blind if you can, and let it wrap you over. One last little thing to even try to explain my love for this movie - I haven't felt this enraptured by a horror film since probably the first time seeing "The Shining." LOOK AT ALL OF THESE BOLD STATEMENTS I AM MAKING, and yet, I honestly feel that this way.
Under the Silver Lake (2018)
Insanely fun homage to Hitchcock
"Under The Silver lake" is one of the greatest homages to Alfred Hitchcock and David Lynch ever made. Sam, played with fantastic nuance by Andrew Garfield, meets Sarah, a dream-like femme fatale who, over the course of an evening, mysteriously disappears from her apartment. Being a loner with no job and nothing to do, Sam sets out to find her, not knowing of the insane descent his journey will take him. Gorgeously shot against the backdrop of eastern Los Angeles, the old Hollywood architecture and mystique of glitz become a character themselves. Much like the sprawling elitism of San Francisco in "Vertigo," or the darkened, twisted hills of "Mulholland Drive," David Robert Mitchell's sophomore film delves deeper and deeper, with scene after scene, moment after moment, into philosophy, conspiracy, fears, humor, love, and departure. Needless to say, this may take the spot for my favorite film of the year.
A Ghost Story (2017)
All of life's greatest struggles, in one simplistic beautiful experience
I am a firm believer that you see movies or hear music or read books at the right time in your life. It makes these subjective medias all the more subjective, much like a fortune cookie or a daily horoscope. David Lowery's "A Ghost Story" is just that film for me right now. This beautiful anti-thesis of modern filmmaking made it's rounds a few years ago, and was considered the indie-darling that people, including myself, just kinda passed on. It has stuck itself permanently into my brain, and will not leave. Every frame, every piece of dialogue, every movement - all contain such grandiose themes and elements, without having to be some meandering epic. I thought of Mallick's "Tree of Life," how broken and weightless that entire 3-hour experience feels - and here, Lowery manages to deal with life, love, death, anger, sadness, grief, and then some in such a simplistic, beautiful way.
Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
Slick, fast, exciting, mysterious
Drew Goddard's work has always been on the forefront of my watchlist, especially whenever anything new is created by him. From Buffy to The Martian, to Cabin in the Woods, and more recently, Bad Times at the El Royale. His film is slick, fast, exciting, mysterious, and so perfectly crafted. It makes me yearn for more whodunnit and caper films, and definitely harkens back to old-school filmmaking with fun twists and turns around every corner.
You Go to My Head (2017)
Gorgeous, emotional mind trip
To begin, I don't know where you can find this film as of right now. I have been assisting with a Film Festival's selection process, and this absolutely stunning film came up. It might be a bold declaration, but some of the visuals in this truly unusual thriller are comparable to "Lawrence of Arabia," with how it captures vistas, minimalism, and just showcasing the story. Keep it on your radar, and for sure add it to your watchlist for something to keep your eyes open for, because this is one of the most beautiful films I have seen in recent memory.
Dead Ringers (1988)
Pseudo-sexual thrills abound
David Cronenberg is, unquestionably, one of the top-tier American filmmakers of our time - with his blend of pseudo-sexual thrills, body horror, and Lovecraftian-styled storytelling. Dead Ringers is no exception, with a stellar dual-performance from Jeremy Irons as twin doctors, and their quest for perfectionism, sexuality, and the terrifying blend of obsession and possessive needs. This film is up there with Cronenberg's finest work, and much like The Fly, it is unflinching in how far it will go.
E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
A perfect reflection on childhood, adulthood, and the fears mortality
With Summer fast approaching, and nostalgia always in the media zeitgeist, I always find myself returning to the masterful works of directors in the 80s. Sure, it is usually out of a desperate want to return to the age of innocence, a time of playing tag with the neighborhood friends, or racing bikes down the street with cards taped to the wheels. But the days are far gone or slipping further and further away. So, I turn to Spielberg or Carpenter or Donner (the list goes on, of course). And nothing so eloquently plays with childhood discovery and the pressure of adulthood better than E.T. If you haven't seen it, or you remember it as a kids film, be sure to revisit it sometime soon. It is truly a director working at their own peak.
Green Room (2015)
"Green Room" is a technical marvel, beyond brutal, and underwhelming in the wrong places...
Jeremy Saulnier's "Green Room" is a step in the right direction; A modernized slasher film that we deserve, but one that feels unrefined. We follow a hardcore punk rock band that, after witnessing a murder, is forced by a group of skinheads to stay in a green room. As tensions and the need to escape intensify, so too does the violence and brutality.
On a technical side, the film is an aesthetically pleasing horror/thriller. Cinematographer Sean Porter has captured the pure grit and grunge of backwoods Oregon, along with the visual beauty of the modern punk rock movement. The atmosphere and mise-en-scene of this film so eloquently move along, which leaves the audience on the edge of their seat, wanting more.
Everything else is wasted potential. Most of the film is not boring, but the patterns of what we expect to happen next become apparent. The "good guys" plan an escape, and they are met with disturbing and brutal violence in their wake. The violence is stunning, but it's not enough to care. The characters are all just archetypes and portraits of what I would expect from a Texas Chainsaw sequel. The good guys are "good guys" because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. The bad guys are "bad guys" because they are Neo- Nazis, which is enough justification to do what they do.
Unfortunately, because of these simplistic archetypes, I don't care enough for the consequences of anyone, protagonists or antagonists. Nor do they seem to care at points. The threat of death, or of this venue being discovered by the police, is apparent, and yet, no one takes them seriously. I have no problems with simplistic characters or motivations, but with how complex the film presents itself, it left me wanting more. A good example of the slasher archetypes done right, in recent memory, is "Cabin in the Woods," which blends humor, gore, terror, and a level of meta-filmmaking that is complex and great. "Green Room" didn't need to be this, but it needed more complicated characters to root for.
The cast did fine, including a sub-par Patrick Stewart. Saulnier's previous film, "Blue Ruin" comes highly recommend over this more recent effort. Overall, this film didn't have any message to take away. The only thematic take-away I have is a line from one of the band members calling out a skinhead, saying, "You were much scarier at night." The theme here being that there really are monsters in the dark. But that's it. A patterned story about a band trying to escape from a concert hall is a fun idea, presented at a very high level of technical prowess, which thankfully brings a level of professionalism to the slasher genre. However, like the slasher genre, I don't care for the mix of eccentric and bland "good guys," and unlike the slasher genre, I don't care for the bland and predictable villains. I would give "Green Room" a 6/10.
Sing Street (2016)
"Sing Street" is a Beautiful Modern Musical
John Carney's "Sing Street" is a masterful modern musical. It delves into the relatable complexities of aspiring talents everywhere. It is a fun, engaging, charming, and often beautiful reflection on what goes through the ever-changing minds of those who want more in life. Carney's previous efforts are all in the similar vein of hopeful desperation, but something about the youthful approach in this film makes it stand out as an absolutely must-see.
The film follows Cosmo, a 15-year-old guitarist. As his parents enter the final stages of a troubled marriage, Cosmo is sent to an All- Boys Irish-Catholic Preparatory Institute. This new school is strictly run by Brother Baxter, who leaves no room for personal endeavors into one's soul. That is, until one day, when Cosmo first meets Rafina. An eccentric and perplexing character, she embodies the idea and beauty of chaos (something that the refined find ever so appealing nowadays, it appears). But more importantly, Rafina is the catalyst for Cosmo to pursue some sort of artistic endeavor in his life, and begin to explore his greater expressions. In an attempt to woo her, Cosmo creates a ragtag band with his fellow cohorts, a selection of hilarious misfit students. From here, the film delves deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of love, music, art, and the pursuit of happiness.
When "Sing Street" works, it works. The film is composed of simplistic cinematography that helps capture an enlightened look of (often gloomily portrayed) Ireland. The performances are all superb, especially the chemistry between the lead performances of newcomer Ferdia Walsh-Peelo (Cosmo), and the beautiful Lucy Boynton. The supporting cast is great, but the best moments often come from the under-utilized fellow band-mates, who are hilarious. Most importantly, the energy of the original music, and the scenes enveloped around the various compositions, are beautiful. Every song is fitting for the era, and deeply meaningful. I suspect this soundtrack will go very far in the future. The peak of this film falls in the end of the second act, during a well-crafted fantasy sequence for Cosmo, as he pictures the young, charming, musician ideals. He imagines performing to an energetic prom-night crowd, all set to the theme of "the dance scene in Back to the Future." He pictures Rafina coming in to dance, the crowd parting ways, and everything being resolved in his life. But as the song finishes, his fantasy ends, and he returns to the bleak reality of the world around him.
These beautiful moments are littered throughout the film, and make it all the better. Unfortunately, I have two major qualms with this film. First and foremost, the performance from Jack Reynor as 'Brendan,' Cosmo's elder brother, who acts as a secondary catalyst for Cosmo's interest in music, is mediocre at best. Despite a hilariously well-written character, Reynor's attempt at an Irish accent often slips in and out of authenticity, and makes it very distracting to believe in him.
The second critique I have regards the clichés of modern romance films. Rafina is first presented as a strong, independent female. She desperately wishes to leave the clutches of her home in Ireland, to sail to the shores of Britain, and pursue her dreams of being a model. And despite these strong ideals, she is reduced down to a Siren for Cosmo. Their affection for each other is palpable, but in the end, her dreams are set aside. She becomes a weak, secondary character.
Why this peeves me so much is that I have seen this before. Millions of times. I could list off film after film after film where a male character is introduced to some amazing female figure, strives for her, temporarily loses her, but after some time, they reunite. It's so beyond cliché at this point, that I want something more real to happen. I had hoped the film would have taken a more cynical or realist approach, and have Rafina leave the island for good, off into the world to pursue her dreams of becoming a model. This loss would have been a more connectable motivation for Cosmo, and to see his music to take form. Per typical romance film clichés, though, this was not the case. The two get together, and live happily ever after.
Overall, "Sing Street" has the potential to be a classic coming-of- age film for future ages. But more importantly, this film is a perfect musical. The age and days of the American musicals are done and over. "West Side Story" is gone; "Chicago" and "Oklahoma" can remain places on a map. If "Sing Street" gives us any sign on the new musical approach in film, we are in great hands. There is a beautiful line in the film where the sinister Brother Baxter, after forcing Cosmo to wipe away make-up from his face, says to him, "No more Ziggy Stardust." And, as sad and timely as that statement is (Rest in Peace Mr. Bowie), it's true. The time for classic music and artistic expressions of the past have come and gone. But what lies in their wake, and what rises from the ashes, is something to be excited for.
I would give "Sing Street" an 8/10.
The Conjuring (2013)
Holy Hot Damn, Go See This Right Now!
This is a rarity of a film. This is a rarity of a horror film. It relies on scaring the audience through shear visceral images and moments, rather than relying on blood, gore, and dropping of the Fawk word to gain the attention of movie-goers. We have been so attached to films like the most recent Texas Chainsaw Massacre film as they are the only horror films we can have as of late, but this film... It combines elements of classic horror and supernatural films like the Exorcist and Poltergeist, and so many others, to not only give the audience genuine, non-cheap scares, but moments that leave you in chills. Sure, this may be speaking from opinion, but it's kind of a rarity to feel this way in a horror film as of recently. Evil Dead, great and fun film, but not once did I feel goosebumps from what I was seeing. True, completely separate entities in the genre, but hopefully you get my point. A horror film is supposed to leave the audience in both a state of not knowing what is going to happen next EVER, and not knowing what to do once you leave the theater. And this film provides. Easily. James Wan is an incredible horror film director, and this is easily his best. It has deeper levels of character development than the common audience member might be used to, it has such a great sense of (Warning: film-major word about to appear) mise-en-scene for when anything at all is happening, especially during chaotic, frightening moments. It also has one of the absolute best casts I've seen in a horror film yet, right down to every. Single. Child actor. Unusual to say, I agree, but without a doubt, stunned by how good they were. No one in the film is up there in stardom, but this film is easily an example of them being showcased very well.
And this film has an "R" rating, and in my book, it deserves it. Not for blood. Not for language. No sexual anything whatsoever. How is it not "G"? Well, this film does not let up on the disturbing imagery, and said imagery if far and far away from being subtle. Although, the subtly of some moments does work. Conflicting messages here, I agree, but understand what I am trying to get at: When this film isn't subtle, it works, and it is frightening. When this film IS subtle, it works, and tends to even be more frightening (I'm looking at you, armoire... you bastard...)
If you like being scared, or like even good films, please, please, oh Jesus-Tap-Dancing-Christ please, go see this movie. It is so absolutely perfect for a modern day horror film that will no doubt last for a long time to come.