Info

Art Opinions

Posts tagged 21st Century Film Criticism

2016 is now officially in the fast lane toward its end. I wanted to come up with my list of the movies that have most impressed me and discovered that very few films released this year have really impressed me. But then I realized that there were more than a few I had seen last year that were only released this year. This has helped my ability to come up with a list, but 2016 has not been a great year at the movies. Film Art created for the television is slowly taking over. Here is a list of the movies that really held my attention so far this year. Please note that I am not listing in any particular order and that these are my personal opinions. None of my opinions are connected with any distributor, film festival or artist. These are my thoughts and mine alone.

"Wouldst thou like to live deliciously?" The Witch Robert Eggers, 2015

“Wouldst thou like to live deliciously?”
The Witch
Robert Eggers, 2015

Robert Eggers’ The Witch works on both literal and metaphorical levels. It is also fairly flawless in execution, style and complete formation. Repeated viewings only further enforce its power. This is a masterful bit of Art Horror that aims far higher than being scary. Taking itself seriously, The Witch weaves a story that is as simple as it is complex.

On one level this is a straight up horror film. Jarin Blaschke’s camera work is fully intertwined with Eggers’ vision. The entire cast is exceptional. The sense of dread never lets up, but the implications of what we see come to a sharp tipping point. More than a film about evil taking over the lives of supposedly devout family of settlers, The Witch is a very dark contemplation on both the repression and oppression of women. In many ways this film points toward a parable regarding empowerment. This is an empowerment that is as grim as it is magical.

"Peek-a-boo!" The Witch Robert Eggers, 2015 Cinematography | Jarin Blaschke

“Peek-a-boo!”
The Witch
Robert Eggers, 2015
Cinematography | Jarin Blaschke

Many horror fans have expressed displeasure over this movie. For some it just isn’t scary enough, but for many of us it is chilling to the bone. Highly literate, creative and a brilliant use of a low budget — The Witch is something altogether new. A rare feat within the realm of horror filmmaking, this movie has a wider wing span.

Brady Corbet proved his skill as an actor quite a while back. He has been working since he was a child. Over the course of the last several years his career’s focus has been a bit off the grid comparatively speaking. He has worked for some expertly talented directors over better financial and fame-oriented jobs. This year he made his directorial debut and his choices as actor make perfect sense. I suspect Corbet was learning how to make films that strive to do more than simply entertain. The Childhood of a Leader is one of the most impressive actor-to-director debuts I’ve ever seen.

"A Stunning Debut." The Childhood of a Leader Brady Corbet, 2015

“A Stunning Debut.”
The Childhood of a Leader
Brady Corbet, 2015

There is nothing “safe” about The Childhood of a Leader.  This unusual film is masterful and keenly tuned into Auteur Theoretical Filmmaking. Just as it disregards filmmaking predictability, it shuns the idea of subtly.  Audacious in what it pursues, The Childhood of a Leader is not aimed at the cineplex and is not concerned with the possible difficulties it might offer members of the audience. The goals and stakes are high from beginning to end. Corbet and co-writer, Mona Fastvold, are smart enough to keep the proceedings minimal in the visual sense. There are no signs of low budget film present. Corbet has wisely invested his budget where it will benefit the highest yield.

"He's been acting out a little bit." The Childhood of a Leader Brady Corbet, 2015 Cinematography | Lol Crawley

“He’s been acting out a little bit.”
The Childhood of a Leader
Brady Corbet, 2015
Cinematography | Lol Crawley

Scott Walker was secured as the film’s musical composer and his skills / work are utilized to maximum impact. Corbet has applied the same level of trust regarding cinematography and editing. Both of these essential elements are applied with deceptively simple approaches. Lol Crawley and David Jancso bring forward their finest work. The same can be said for every artist Corbet has secured both behind and in front of the camera. And no artist involved is required to color within the lines. If there are a few cracks from strain, these flaws are minor and easily forgiven.

Do not be fooled by the impressive scoring, cinematography, editing and various styles of acting. This film’s impact is not owed singularly to any one artistic aspects. The real power belongs to a director who is unafraid to allow his excellent players the opportunity to bring forward their best respective games. Corbet confidently conducts every aspect of this movie for his orchestrated gut punch. This is artistic collaboration at its best. The Childhood of a Leader comes close to perfection. Intense, passionate and memorable — Childhood builds scene upon scene achieving a pure cinematic crescendo. It is sublime and totally apocalyptic.

"He's just a little boy..." Tom Sweet The Childhood of a Leader Brady Corbet, 2015 Cinematography | Lol Crawley

“He’s just a little boy…”
Tom Sweet
The Childhood of a Leader
Brady Corbet, 2015
Cinematography | Lol Crawley

This study in sociopathic tendencies pushes us toward a culturally shared visceral nightmare. Corbet’s film arrives at a time that makes it all the more potent. For whatever reason, IFC did very little to promote this challenging film. This is not an easy movie. It requires attention and thought, but it never bores. There is most certainly an audience for films this amazing. If you did not have the opportunity to catch it during its brief appearance on cinema screens, seek it out now. It  is currently available via VOD. I’ve seen it twice and I can’t wait to see it again.

Unlike many of my friends / associates, I have never been all that excited about Matteo Garrone’s work. I’m embarrassed to write that I passed up the opportunity to see his latest, Tale of Tales. This was my loss. I so wish I had experienced this strange film on a big screen.

"A feast for the imagination" Tale of Tales Matteo Garrone, 2016

“The equilibrium of the world must be retained.”
Tale of Tales
Matteo Garrone, 2016

Matteo Garrone’s film is adapted from Giambattista Basile’s Pentamerone, but is unfolded in a confoundedly unique manner. I always got the sense that Garrone’s visionary sense was unique, but I had no idea he was this imaginative. Surrounded by only the finest of artists, he has concocted something unexpected and unforgettable. Fantastical, gothic, dark and often disturbing — these are not the sort of “fairy tales” one would tell a child.

The presentation is “adults only,” but the lack of “lessons” or “moral points” are completely childlike. When one thinks back to the fairy tales shared with us as children, we often only remember the scary or darker details. As a child the moral compass is only starting to form. The level of experience is too limited to fully grasp the philosophical. The same can be said of this Tale of Tales.

"It was a mistake! My Love, please! John C. Riley Tale of Tales Matteo Garrone, 2016 Cinematography | Peter Suschitzky

“It was a mistake! My Love, please!
John C. Riley
Tale of Tales
Matteo Garrone, 2016
Cinematography | Peter Suschitzky

Peter Suschitzky’s cinematography here is more reminiscent of his earlier work under Ken Russell’s tutelage. Images of spaces, faces and reveals convey levels of absurdity, passion, curiosity and awestruck attention. Garrone’s film is as grotesque as it is beautiful. As provocative as it is innocent. These tales are largely unknown to American audiences. Garrone delivers them with a giddiness that is contagious.

IFC did not do a great job with theatrical promotion and I skipped the short opportunity to see it because it felt like it was going to be a low-rent copy of Terry Gilliam.

It wasn’t and it isn’t.

It received a very limited run, but is now available from the folks at Shout! Factory on DVD/Blu-ray. Tale of Tales should not be dismissed or ignored. See it.

"Could you just read the part where they kiss?" Salma Hayek Tale of Tales Matteo Garrone, 2016 Cinematography | Peter Suschitzky

“Could you just read the part where they kiss?”
Salma Hayek
Tale of Tales
Matteo Garrone, 2016
Cinematography | Peter Suschitzky

Oscilloscope Laboratories put forward a great deal of care and time in the promotion and release of Anna Rose Holmer’s The Fits. It was thanks to this that I made the effort to see the movie. I was also more than a little curious to see where ARH would take the audience. One of the most fascinating films in years, The Fits does not fit easily into a category and simply refuses all labels. The film’s promotion gave very little away regarding The Fits. It was not the movie I was anticipating. How often does that happen after we see a distribution company’s trailer?

Never flinching... The Fits Anna Rose Holmer, 2015

Never flinching…
The Fits
Anna Rose Holmer, 2015

The Fits is essentially about a young girl slipping into young adulthood, but it would be misleading to limit it to “the coming of age” troop. There is absolutely nothing expected about this movie. When I sat down to watch it for the first time it turned my expectations inside-out. Anna Rose Holmer’s film follows an eleven-year-old girl, played with disarming realism by Royalty Hightower, as attempts to shift her attention from the boys’ side of a community center to enter what she perceives as the magical other side. The girls’ side of the community center is focused on team spirit dancing.

What it feels like for a girl... Royalty Hightower The Fits Anna Rose Holmer, 2015 Cinematography | Paul Yee

What it feels like for a girl…
Royalty Hightower
The Fits
Anna Rose Holmer, 2015
Cinematography | Paul Yee

Suddenly the tomboy desires to be a member of an all female dance team. More than a little unsure of herself and the young women who she knows occupy the thoughts of the boys with whom she has always played, Toni must decide if she has what it takes to fit in with this feminine bunch. This is a visual and auditory film experience. The dialogue is limited, but when we are allowed to hear what Toni hears it is crucial information.

One more week, ladies!” a woman coach announces to the young women. Adults do not figure into Toni‘s perception of her world. They are not yet key players, but Toni hears the adults when it is required. The marker of a week becomes an important tracker within the film’s story. Toni’s decision to attempt to assimilate is crucial. ARH never demonstrates the least amount of bombast or over-statement of actions, but we understand that Toni’s every movement is a key predictor to her future.

Paul Yee’s camerawork is tight and fluid all at once. Composers, Danny Bensi and Saunder Jurriaans, provide the film with a hypnotic musical score. Anna Rose Holmer, like Brady Corbet, is unafraid to share the glory. I point this out because the collaborative element of filmmaking seems to be once again slipping away from many film productions. ARH fully utilizes all artists involved to spark her film into life. The Fits does not merely spark to life, it is almost a living organism unto itself. What happens in The Fits is not a totally unique turn, but the way in which the film’s dance moves are constructed / conveyed is jaw-dropping.

It's not what you think... Royalty Hightower The Fits Anna Rose Holmer, 2015 Cinematography | Paul Yee

It’s not what you think…
Royalty Hightower
The Fits
Anna Rose Holmer, 2015
Cinematography | Paul Yee

A child’s attempts to join a dance team form into something that edges well beyond any expected boundary. Often disturbing, mysterious, strange, sensual and magical — The Fits is cinematic poetry. Many cringe at the intermingling of words like cinema and poetry. This mashup has become over-used, but never has the concept fit better than attributing it here. Anna Rose Holmer did not need a big budget to make her movie breathe, throb, squirm and float magically to life. This movie never falters in its movements toward alchemy. The Fits is not a movie that a film lover can afford to miss.

"Let's be clear. It won't end well." Green Room Jeremy Saulnier, 2015

“Let’s be clear. It won’t end well.”
Green Room
Jeremy Saulnier, 2015

Jeremy Saulnier’s film manages to establish all characters with minimal screen time or information, but this does not mean that we do not know these characters. Green Room speaks to Saulnier’s ability as an exceptional storyteller who can put forward all required quickly thanks to the way in which he writes and shoots. We know everything we need to know about the members of a desperate and rag-tag American Hardcore band within less than ten minutes.

An odd but exceptional casting choice. Patrick Stewart Green Room Jeremy Saulnier, 2015 Cinematography | Sean Porter

An odd but exceptional casting choice.
Patrick Stewart
Green Room
Jeremy Saulnier, 2015
Cinematography | Sean Porter

Green Room‘s horrors come fast and are packed with surprisingly intense cruelty. Even more surprising is the fact that this film is perversely fun but never lacking in realism. Green Room takes itself seriously. When our messy heroes decide to piss off their Fascist audience by crashing into a wicked cover of The Dead Kennedy’s “Nazi Punks Fuck Off,” the comedy of the moment is stained with the menacing reality of their situation. It is difficult to articulate why this movie is so much fun, but sick fun it is. Alia Shaukat, Patrick Stewart, Imogen Poots and the late Anton Yeltsin deliver top tier work for this twisted cinematic adventure. Always pushing past the normal boundaries of the exploitation genre, Green Room is close to brilliant.

A down-and-out hardcore band's gig takes more than a couple of very bad turns... Green Room Jeremy Saulnier, 2015 Cinematography | Sean Porter

A down-and-out hardcore band’s gig takes more than a couple of very bad turns…
Green Room
Jeremy Saulnier, 2015
Cinematography | Sean Porter

Karyn Kusama’s The Invitation is another movie that cleverly pushes beyond the horror exploitation genre. This is a highly effective example of not only great storytelling, but the power of tight cinematic construction. Kusama has mastered the basics of movie making to a point that she manipulate all of them to create something exceptional that in the hands of another filmmaker would play as tired or even predictable.

"There is nothing to be afraid of" The Invitation Karyn Kusama, 2015

“There is nothing to be afraid of”
The Invitation
Karyn Kusama, 2015

The Invitation never pushes itself so much that the low-budget is reflected and Kusama is not aiming to re-invent the wheel, but she adheres to smart editing, clever writing and talented actors to create an expanding element of suspense, dread and fear. As the movie leads into what appears to be The Dinner Party from Hell, we become invested and ultimately shocked. What probably should have been a mediocre film has been transformed into a highly entertaining and mesmerizing exercise in cinematic horror. I feel this is one of the best films we will see this year.

Maybe this guest is just paranoid. Logan Marshall-Green The Invitation Karyn Kusama, 2015 Cinematography | Bobby Shore

Maybe this guest is just paranoid.
Logan Marshall-Green
The Invitation
Karyn Kusama, 2015
Cinematography | Bobby Shore

Mickey Keating is all of twenty-five years of age and he has already accomplished more than most film artists can muster in an entire career. It is still unclear if he plans to move beyond the horror film genre, but it does not really matter. Having been mentored by the great Larry Fessenden, this filmmaker has already cemented a place among horror fans. Keating made two films for 2015 release. The first, POD, is an exceptional cinematic brew of paranoia and human horror. The second film did not actually secure a release date until 2016 and it is one of the most impressive films of the year.

"A lonely girl's violent descent into madness..." Darling Mickey Keating, 2015

“A lonely girl’s violent descent into madness…”
Darling
Mickey Keating, 2015

What Keating’s Darling lacks in originality is made up for by stylization and expertly modulated cinematic manipulation. Intended as much as an ode to the great psycho-dramas of the 1960’s/1970’s as full stand alone movie, Darling is so well made that it manages to morph itself into something borrowed but very new. This slow-burn psychological horror movie transcends extreme budgetary limitations and pulls the audience into a hypnotically disturbing ride into madness.

"Don't concern yourself with that room, dear." Sean Young Darling Mickey Keating, 2015 Cinematography | Mac Fisken

“Don’t concern yourself with that room, dear.”
Sean Young
Darling
Mickey Keating, 2015
Cinematography | Mac Fisken

Filmed in simplistic video black and white, Mickey Keating sets the mood immediately and is unrelenting in holding us there through to the film’s final image. Sean Young makes a brief but memorable appearance that allows Keating to establish everything in a matter of a few minutes. Clearly inspired by Roman Polanski, William Friedkin, Ingmar Bergman and more than a little Robert Altman — Keating’s cinematic exorcise demonstrates not only his knowledge but his resourceful skills. The young director is having a blast and so does his audience. Though it should be pointed out that this fun comes with more than a little white-knuckle suspense, tension and horror.

"I was waiting for you." Lauren Ashley Carter Darling Mickey Keating, 2015 Cinematography | Mac Fisken

“I was waiting for you.”
Lauren Ashley Carter
Darling
Mickey Keating, 2015
Cinematography | Mac Fisken

Mac Fisken’s cinematography is meticulous and easily recalls a sort of mashup of Gordon Willis, Gilbert Taylor and Sven Nyqvist. Yes, you read me right. Fisken manages to recreate visual suspense intermingled with beauty. Valerie Krulfeifer’s editing is a perfect match for Keating’s odd retro-horror stylings. Fiona Ostinelli’s musical score is equally effective. But the key collaborating artist is actor, Lauren Ashley Carter. In the film’s title role, this actor’s babydoll eyes and on-screen presence manage to not only win us over — she is able to spin these aspects on a dime. While we do like her — she is also able to repulse us. This actress literally haunts the screen.

" I don't think you realize what a godsend you are." Darling Mickey Keating, 2015 Cinematography | Mac Fisken

” I don’t think you realize what a godsend you are.”
Darling
Mickey Keating, 2015
Cinematography | Mac Fisken

Unconcerned with plot, Darling has only two true goals: it wants to get under the skin, but then it intends to imprint into our brains. It achieves both. Low-fi but exceptionally crafted from all perspectives — Darling signals that Mickey Keating is playing for keeps. His second film of this year is currently in cinemas. Carnage Park has a bigger budget than both POD and Darling and it is a solid horror film, but it lacks Darling‘s power punch. I walked out of Darling a fan.

There was no way Ben Wheatley’s High-Rise would match the media promotion that launched it. I knew that going in, but I was under-whelmed with this adaptation of JG Ballard. Impeccable production values, cinematography and exceptional performances — High-Rise should have worked, but it fell short. So to speak. Ballard’s High-Rise is a complex and dated novel. It might not have helped that Amy Jump and Ben Wheatley opted to keep it all grounded in the original time period. The smart use of Thatcher’s infamous speech at the close was a good one, but it came a bit late into the film’s game.

"Welcome to the high life..." High-Rise Ben Wheatley, 2015

“Welcome to the high life…”
High-Rise
Ben Wheatley, 2015

The mixing of satire with dark comedy loses focus. This could largely be related to the fact that the punch of the story has lost much meaning some 40 years later. Ballard’s ideas rooted in that decade often feel more “twee” than “provocative.” There is not enough context to understand why “we” are in the 1970’s. Without directly mooring Ballard’s ideas to the 21st Century, much of what he was thinking feels flimsy within the trappings of Wheatley’s chosen genres of satire and comedy. It is also hard to fathom the task of capturing Ballard’s novel in a 2 hour movie. The actions in High-Rise move far too quickly to really understand.

"Looks like the rot's set in." Tom Hiddleston goes for broke... High-Rise Ben Wheatley, 2015 Cinematography | Laurie Rose

“Looks like the rot’s set in.”
Tom Hiddleston goes for broke…
High-Rise
Ben Wheatley, 2015
Cinematography | Laurie Rose

It’s as if the pears sold on the shopping floor are ripe one minute and then rotting the next.  The building’s descent into madness and chaos is presented here as an extreme switch. Wheatley does not give the movie enough time to chart the plot’s key initiative. The actual connection of the doctor’s professional life to the new place he inhabits is never fully formed. I find it hard to understand why we even needed to follow the doctor’s fall into professional lethargy. I was also confused by the excessive use of Hiddleston as a sex object. I have no problem with it, but I do not understand why this was important. And worst of all, the connections between the residents is never fully fleshed-out. These people are over-sexed but it is not presented in the appropriate context. It is a hazy mess of societal revolution, sexual perversity and insanity.

A fall from the upper class... High-Rise Ben Wheatley, 2015 Cinematography | Laurie Rose

A fall from the upper class…
High-Rise
Ben Wheatley, 2015
Cinematography | Laurie Rose

High-Rise is flawed, but credit must be given to an independent film that strives to be this ambitious. High-Rise attempts to do so much. Sadly most of these attempts are simply out of reach. Or maybe I’m mistaken. It is quite possible that Ben Wheatley might be ahead of the curve. My opinion regarding High-Rise might shift as the years go by. I know my opinion has improved with only four viewings. And I’m certain I will be watching it again. When I take into account that I have seen this film five times, I feel obliged to include it in my list.

Yes, it is a very unconventional love story... The Lobster Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015

Yes, it is a very unconventional love story…
The Lobster
Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015

No one can complain that Yorgos Lanthimos’ The Lobster isn’t a unique. Lanthimos addresses some of humanity’s deepest concerns and challenges by use of a Surrealistic bit of Existentialism gone to Absurdist artistic gestures. The most surprising aspect of The Lobster is that is intentional not funny. It is also not limited by what might seem like a One-Joke Idea. Loneliness, isolation, desperation and the craving for meaningful connections are never treated as comical. While there are comical elements to the situations, this is a dramatic film. The situation is a result of societal judgment. A judgement that lands these lost souls to a last resort to secure a life partner or face being turned from human into an animal. For the most part, this situations are rendered relatable. Colin Farrell delivers his best on-screen performance as a recently jilted man who doesn’t seem to be able to find his footing in life. He is the sole reason this film resonates so well. He is a sort of “Every Man” who has gotten lost in the shuffle of his life.

" Back then, he didn't know how much it hurts to be alone..." Colin Farrell The Lobster Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015 Cinematography | Thimios Bakatakis

” Back then, he didn’t know how much it hurts to be alone…”
Colin Farrell
The Lobster
Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015
Cinematography | Thimios Bakatakis

He didn’t burst into tears and he didn’t think that the first thing most people do when they realize someone doesn’t love them anymore is cry,” Rachel Weisz’s emotionlessly blunt narration tell us. It is up to Farrell to provide the emotional resonation. And he does. It will be interesting to see if the Hollywood Power Elite choose to allow him an Oscar nomination. He does deserve it.

As this story of uncomfortable misfits attempting to attract a partner, or remain human or live as hunted loners — The Lobster lulls us into thinking that things just might work out. Lanthimos’ isn’t going to let anyone off easily. Our protagonist is not exactly the kind fellow you might expect. He, too, is capable of extremes to avoid a great deal. David can be cruel and he often feels little to no pity for others. In many ways, David is the ideal protagonist for The Lobster. The film’s resolution offers a truly sharp edged view of what we are willing to do for love — perhaps even a delusion of love. The Lobster offers no comfort or easy outs.

"I'm going to do it with a knife." Colin Farrell The Lobster Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015 Cinematography | Thimios Bakatakis

“I’m going to do it with a knife.”
Colin Farrell
The Lobster
Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015
Cinematography | Thimios Bakatakis

The film’s first act is amazing. The second half becomes a bit sluggish. And the Michael Haneke -ish ending note is not the surprising gut-punch that Lanthimos was most likely going for, but it does make a point. It is a memorable film. My main objection to keeping this film as one of my favorites is that it ultimately disappointed me. In comparison to both Dogtooth and Alps, The Lobster seems weak. I list it here because it does stand out as one of the better films of the year. If this 2015-intended film had actually come out last year it would not have made my list. The Lobster feels like a bit of compromise. Lanthimos can do better. And he should.

This might be fantastic... Isabelle Huppert Things to Come Mia Hansen-Løve, 2016 Cinematography | Denis Lenoir

This might be fantastic…
Isabelle Huppert
Things to Come
Mia Hansen-Løve, 2016
Cinematography | Denis Lenoir

The year is not done and my list of favorites could change, but I somehow doubt it. I do have high hopes for Isabelle Huppert’s collaborations with both Paul Verhoeven (Elle) and Mia Hansen-Løve (Things to Come) Both have some strong buzz, but this sort of buzz has been off before.

On paper, it seems like the perfect director and lead actor for the subject matter. But I can't be the only person now suspecting that it's not going to work. ? Joseph Gordon-Levitt SNOWDEN Oliver Stone, 2016 Cinematography | Anthony Dod Mantle

On paper, it seems like the perfect director and lead actor for the subject matter. But I can’t be the only person now suspecting that it’s not going to work. ?
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
SNOWDEN
Oliver Stone, 2016
Cinematography | Anthony Dod Mantle

Time will tell. And I’ve a growing worry that Snowden is destined to fail. I hope I’m wrong. But of the films listed for release between now and year’s end, this was the one that seemed the most exciting.

We will see…

Matty Stanfield, 9.9.2016

*** ADDENDUM!!!

I’m an idiot who often attempts to do too many things at one time. In the above blog post I wrote, “But of the films listed for release between now and year’s end, this was the one that seemed the most exciting.” This is a major error on my part.

In that sentence I was referring to Oliver Stone’s Snowden. I have a roster of upcoming film releases. I track film releases with this roster. I had printed an updated roster this past Monday. As I marked the upcoming films that I am waiting to see, I marked Elle, Things to Come and Snowden. I somehow failed to mark a fourth film that I am very eager to see.

"She loved men..." The Love Witch Anna Biller, 2016

“She loved men…”
The Love Witch
Anna Biller, 2016

Anna Biller is a Film Artist I’ve been following since the late 1990’s when she made a short entitled, Fairy Ballet. Back in 2007 she made a brilliant feature film, Viva, which remains firmly imprinted in my psyche. Never one to compromise her vision or voice, I was worried that it might take a long time to have the opportunity to see her latest film, The Love Witch. The media industry of the 21st Century has never been more hostile toward original visionary work than it is right now. But there are still a few distributors who are more interested in quality than major studio concerns regarding conforming to concepts of mainstream appeal — Oscilloscope Laboratories demonstrated their savvy when they secured distribution rights for The Love Witch!

Will the use of The Craft bring her love? Samantha Robinson The Love Witch Anna Biller, 2016 Cinematography | M. David Mullen

Will the use of The Craft bring her love?
Samantha Robinson
The Love Witch
Anna Biller, 2016
Cinematography | M. David Mullen

What really puzzles me about my error in not only marking but mentioning the inevitableness that I will love Ms. Biller’s new film is that I’ve been following this film so closely over the last several months. D’oh!

But Anna Miller’s The Love Witch is a film that is destined to make my list for Favorite Films of 2016. And, no, I am not headed into the cinema with anticipations that will fail to live up to the work on the screen. Ms. Biller is one of those filmmakers who consistently manage to construct work that entices me.

Samantha Robinson The Love Witch Anna Biller, 2016 Cinematography | M. David Mullen

Coming soon… Samantha Robinson
The Love Witch
Anna Biller, 2016
Cinematography | M. David Mullen

So for the record, I’m very excited about this upcoming film. I apologize for failing to mention in my initial post.  A note of thanks to Dave for the call!

M. Stanfield, 9.10.2016

 

 

 

It is always uncomfortable when you have a “connection” to a film artist and that person either creates or has applied skills into a film  you do not like.

How does one navigate this? Carefully.

Some enjoy this game. I do not. If I have a connection, no matter how fragmented or casual, I usually opt to say / write nothing. This is most especially true of this blog.  As I make no money for anything I write/do I am not under the sort of pressures to conform or restrain my opinions. I am just not comfortable writing negative feedback when I know someone connected to a project will read it here. I’ve even become cautious on my Letterboxd account. But some of the ratings and comments I’ve made on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes has come back to haunt me. When RT first came around, I didn’t really apply much thought into how the site was calculating film reviews and user ratings. I’ve been surprised at how harshly I’ve rated some films and how grandly I’ve rated others. …in comparison.

Yes. I’ve contributed to the dreaded Film Criticism by Consensus. This idea has been spreading throughout the Film Theory community for quite a while. It can most likely be traced back to that moment that Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert sat down together. More or less, this is when the simplistic and problematic Film Judgement by Consensus started. In theory it seems like a valid approach. Sadly, in practice it is flawed, harmful and unfair. Even more so now that we can all be Film Critics and our ratings are tallied by a computer program. But the end-user ratings are not near as worrying when you really look into RT logic applied to paid Film Critics.

"It's Terrific!" ...and it remains so. It is without question a cinematic masterpiece that endures. But is it a perfect movie? Citizen Kane Orson Welles, 1941

“It’s Terrific!” …and it remains so. It is without question a cinematic masterpiece that endures. But is it a perfect movie?
Citizen Kane
Orson Welles, 1941

When Movie Holics posted this clip, they summed up the issue with Film Ranking by Consensus with humor, intelligence and logic. Their topic is Josh Trank’s much maligned, Fantastic Four. Take a look:

I’m a fan of Movie Holics. Founded by Kyler Wilson and Monica Kocurek, this YouTube Channel provides encaging, entertaining and most importantly — insightful and valid Film Theory application. Kyler Wilson is a skilled and professional filmmaker. A working Film Actor, professional Crew Member and aspiring filmmaker, Kyler Wilson offers opinions that are solidly grounded in both arenas of Film Buff and Film Artist. Monica Kocurek also brings grounded logic and humor that fit in perfectly within his framework.

Movie Holics YouTube Brought to you by Kyler Wilson & Monica Kocurek

Movie Holics
YouTube
Brought to you by
Kyler Wilson & Monica Kocurek

Often a counter-perspective and love of movies that matches Wilson’s, she holds her own. Together and separately, these two self-admitted Movie Holics are knowledgeable and entertaining.  These two individuals are clearly serious film buffs with a sense of humor. Always fun and filled with ideas, their postings are always of interest. It is also important to note that they are often focused on offering view-points into current and big-studio projects. If ever the major studios were confused, it is now.

Kyler Wilson and Monica Kocurek of Movie Holics Reviewing, discussing and challenging the status quo of Mainstream Film Art Movie Holics You Tube Channel

Kyler Wilson and Monica Kocurek of Movie Holics
Reviewing, discussing and challenging the status quo of Mainstream Film Art
Movie Holics
You Tube Channel

 

And Kyler and Monica put forward logic which is desperately needed within the film industry.

If you are unaware of them, take a few minutes to check out the short episode linked below.

To those of you in the industry, please check Movie Holics out.

Yes, you. You know who you are. 

https://youtu.be/tyo38IJQyEU

Another important side note regarding Movie Holics: Kyler Wilson often discusses the current mode of major studio film promotion. His critique of film trailers is of particular interest. Aside from being entertaining, he points out some on-going blunders that studio marketing continues to make. There are some very logical insights here that Major Film Studios are completely lacking.

Adding my own perspective regarding the current state of the Movie Preview: A trend which I first noted in the mid-1980’s is this seeming need to show us the entire film in one preview. This is a mistake. Let’s bring back a bit of mystery. An example of this problem is cited with the trailer / preview for Guillermo del Toro’s Crimson Peak. I had been quite curious to see this new film which boasts a very impressive cast including Jessica Chastain, Tom Hiddleston and Mia Wasikowska. It also sounded like a sort of old-school bit of  Gothica Horror. Sadly, the new trailer shows what appears to be the entire movie. Once again Chastain appears trapped in the role of “The Scary Bitch.” Mia Wasikowska is once again cast as some lame and fragile sort of costumed romantic ideal of 19th Century little girl lost.

Crimson Peak Guillermo del Toro, 2015

Crimson Peak
Guillermo del Toro, 2015

Tom Hiddleston looks as if he has either been covered in a white sort of powder or digitally “enhanced” to serve as a living cartoon. Actually, Crimson Peak appears to be a movie filled with the sort of CGI effects to which I’ve grown increasing indifferent. I no longer plan on paying to see this film. I will wait till it shows up on Amazon Prime, Hulu or Netflix streaming. $20 to $30 is too much to spend on the movie that Legendary Pictures appears to be promoting. I feel as if I’ve already seen it and I was annoyed by what I saw. Could this just be poor marketing or is what we see what we will get? 

The cost of a movie ticket, popcorn and parking is too high to risk.

But I digress — back on mark full-stop: Film Criticism.

Film Criticism took an uplift with a critic like Pauline Kael. Much to her annoyance, she ended up playing a role in turning the world of movies to Film Art. It took an even greater uplift when Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert starting giving “Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down.” This uplift brought Film Art to a more mainstream audience. But, it came with a price. Many began to adapt to the idea that a film can or even should be dismissed with a casual Thumbs Down or embraced by a Thumbs Up.

I remember a friend opting not to see Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven because Siskel gave the movie a Thumbs Down. I was unable to convince him otherwise. Earlier at the beginning of middle school, several friends avoided Sam Rami’s 1981’s classic Evil Dead because both celebrity critics gave it Two Thumbs Down.  One will be surprised to discover many of the films that were given Thumbs Up. Roger Ebert saw fit to give Barbra Streisand’s schizophrenically-flawed 1996 film, The Mirror Has Two Faces, a Thumps Up.

Siskel said "Thumbs Down" Unforgiven Clint Eastwood, 1992 Cinematography | Jack N. Green

Siskel said “Thumbs Down”
Unforgiven
Clint Eastwood, 1992
Cinematography | Jack N. Green

The problem with these short, witty and often troubling criticism notched down to a simple turn of a thumb is that it is tragically misleading.

Example: Eastwood’s Unforgiven is as much a crowd-pleasing bit of Old School Hollywood Epic Western, as it is also a dark and often subversive take on human cruelty and vengeance. While the lines between the Good and Bad Guys are clear, the identity of race, plight of women and the tragedy of violence is explored in a new sort of way. This was a true turning point for Clint Eastwood as a filmmaker. In my opinion this film works quite well and has actually aged even better. It has some flaws that often come when movie actors turn into film directors, but this is a solid work. To dismiss it with a Thumps Down is not even logical. Yet, Gene Siskel felt it deserved him to turn that thumb down. If you actually watch Siskel discuss this film, he does acknowledge what the film is attempting to do. He appears to even be impressed with many of the films’ scenes, performances and ideas.

The idea of the Western genre is a bit subverted and re-imagined... And RT gives it a solid 95% rating. Unforgiven Clint Eastwood, 1992 Cinematography | Jack N. Green

The idea of the Western genre is a bit subverted and re-imagined…
Unforgiven
Clint Eastwood, 1992
Cinematography | Jack N. Green

In the end, Siskel’s issue is that the film simply didn’t fully register for him as something as new and bold as what he anticipated. He questioned the need for one of the film’s characters. While Siskel’s review is far from a cheer for Eastwood’s success, it is also not a total slap-down. When Siskel opted to put his Thumb Down it doesn’t seem to be intended as strong as it implied. Years later, the late critic’s review still stands. It is one of the few bad reviews, yet it really isn’t “bad.”

Roger Ebert did not adore Barbra Streisand’s ill-fitting The Mirror Has Two Faces, but he did see some interesting ideas explored and an even more interesting bit of introspection from a powerful movie star about aging and cultural perceptions of beauty. He also saw a good deal of charisma and comic timing. He gave this film a Thumps Up. Ebert has some valid points, Streisand’s odd film does bring up some interesting ideas about beauty, aging, women and relationships between sisters, mother and men. She had also assembled a great cast of players.

"Thumbs Up!" Comic Feminist ideology, aging, family, love and beauty quickly de-evolve into Female Movie Star Mid-Life Panic. The Mirror Has Two Faces Barbra Streisand, 1996

“Thumbs Up!”
Comic Feminist ideology, aging, family, love and beauty quickly de-evolve into Female Movie Star Mid-Life Panic.
The Mirror Has Two Faces
Barbra Streisand, 1996

Paradoxically, this movie quickly takes an extreme turn away from the gentle comedy and idea it seemed to be forming. It was as if Streisand had a total Movie Superstar Mid-Life Break during filming. Just as the movie seems to be falling into an entertaining and interesting concept, it sputters and teeters. Streisand and her character lose all sense of humor. Suddenly she makes a non-sensical oppositional turn from the core idea of her movie.  Without warning, the main character suddenly decides she needs to kick off every attractive aspect of herself to fit into some grim idea of womanhood. The character stops eating, joking, loses weight and transforms from an attractive hairstyle and clothing into some perverse idea of what Streisand must think is hot. Essentially, she morphs into a Mafia Housewife Gone to Seed. Worse yet, Jeff Bridges and every male character in the movie are suddenly falling all over themselves to sex her up. The film is not good. If one actually watches or reads Ebert’s review, it is surprising that it assigned a Thumps Up as the review is more one of puzzlement ends up forming a sort of cinematic peripheral interest.

Another film that Siskel & Ebert both gave two Thumps Down is 1986’s Short Circuit. This silly and innocent little film is not offensively bad. It is more than a bet “twee” but it does offer a harmless bit of entertainment. No great work of art, but hardly what one could call a “bad movie.” Like both of these legendary Film Critics, I’d be inclined to warn that John Badham’s film is approached in an entirely different manner than we would normally expect. This is no WarGames, but Short Circuit was never intended to be another WarGames. Instead, with Short Circuit John Badham was simply seeking to entertain. Most importantly, his target audience was children. Siskel & Ebert react almost like children themselves. They are upset that the director has stepped off an expected track and into family entertainment. Tragically, the movie’s promotion misleads one to think this could be an extension of WarGames.

A bit of light children's entertainment. "Thumbs Down!" Short Circuit John Badham, 1986

A bit of light children’s entertainment. “Thumbs Down!”
Short Circuit
John Badham, 1986

In truth, the use of their thumbs do not fully jive with their full respective reviews. Gene Siskel has some legitimate issues with the final act of WarGames. For him, WarGames attempts to be more than it should. Yet, he gave the Thumbs Up for WarGames. When it comes to actually reading/listening to their opinions regarding Short Circuit, their Thumbs Down ratings don’t exactly match up. Roger Ebert was clearly entertained by a lot of the ideas of the robot as “character” and Siskel’s perspective is more limited to wanting the silly movie about a robot to be more than it is.

This idea of summing the artistic value of a film with such a simplistically limited value allowed movie studios to hype praise that really was not there. It also served to cause films to completely flop because so many followed those thumbs so closely.

Which brings us to Rotten Tomatoes.

I’ve always thought of Rotten Tomatoes as the more mannered and mature sister to The Internet Movie Database. IMDB is an excellent source of information related to just about every film ever made. But IMDB is a cyber hussy.

Anyone can join and scrawl their opinions on her walls. User Reviews on IMDB run the gamut from Would-Be-Cinephilles like myself to the lowest of the low. User Ratings on IMDB can offer great insight into the validity of a film as much as they are prone to offer profane rants about an actor’s physical anatomy to wishing death upon anyone who likes or hates the movie.

IMDB I think of it as a great repository of media information. However, in some ways, it is the sleazy older sister to Rotten Tomatoes.

IMDB
I think of it as a great repository of media information. However, in some ways, it is the sleazy older sister to Rotten Tomatoes.

When one looks and sorts through information posted by her users, IMDB is turns into a deeply disturbing view of human stupidity. And pity the soul who attempts to write something of value, that person is likely to get flamed hard. However, if you want to know the date a movie came out or where it was filmed or who was in it — this cheap little tart is your girl!  She is more than happy to give you all the information that her servers can hold.

Rotten Tomatoes is a great deal more refined. She sorts out “official” Film Critics, from independent/online Film Critics with some cred and then allows all of her users to rate and post their reviews. Rotten Tomatoes seems to attract less human profanity and cruelty. But here is the odd thing about RT, she employs an overall rounded-estimate based on a 5 Star System ranking. She has been doing this for quite a while. If a paid Film Critic is smart, they know to give a rating based on her 5 Star System or they have no choice but to accept her assessment of their words and her often questionable rating. Several critics still fail to offer a clear rating for poor RT to be able to tabulate. She has no choice but to assign it herself. And while Rotten Tomatoes may be more refined than IMDB, she is pretty limited.

Rotten Tomatoes Welcome to the off-kilter world of Film Evaluation by Consensus. It is a dodgy tool at best...

Rotten Tomatoes
Welcome to the off-kilter world of Film Evaluation by Consensus. It is a dodgy tool at best…

A Film Critic who fails to add a 5 Star rating or at least an A-F grade will often see a generally “fair” review reduced to a 1.5 rating. Users have to enter a rating, but we users are a fickle bunch. Often worse than the film critics. And that is only fair. We have paid money to see these movies. But I can’t be alone in the struggle of deciding if a movie deserves 2 or 3 stars. Or maybe a 2.5. While only a year or so ago I might have rated a movie .5 or 1 star. But as I saw RT’s overall rating of user reviews form into one solid numerical assignment, my .5 rating was adding to confusing and unfair over-all assessments.

In the Rotten Tomatoes Universe, 1983’s WarGames sits pretty with a 93% rating. In a rare situation, the general user rating is actually more on mark with a 75% rating. If you look / listen to Siskel, I suspect his rating for WarGames is closer to a 70%.

Not really.

Short Circuit now sits with a rating of 57% compared to a user rating of 67%. I have to say that the result of the general user rating makes far more sense than 57%. Even more so, if users understood that Short Circuit was really aiming at the 10 to 14 year old audience, the rating would be higher.

Eastwood’s Unforgiven has managed to fair better under the rules and restrictive application of RT’s Film Consensus. However, I feel that Eastwood’s solid film is actually sitting with ratings that I feel are higher than deserved: Film Critic Rating: 95% User Rating: 94%. I would say that this film’s actual rating should be closer to 85%.

Oddly, Streisand’s The Mirror Has Two Faces seems to have been Film Critically panned over the years. This is the film that Ebert gave a Thumbs Up. Currently this film sits with a 53% rating compared to the users rating of 72%. I love Streisand. And I own it. I tend to be aware of her work, and I’m fairly certain that this film once carried a  65% rating. So somehow, over time, RT’s Film Critic rating has gone down for this film. Personally, I feel this cinematic mis-step merits the 53% rating. That being stated, this movie does offer a mis-guided level of entertainment value. There is a cultural and psychologically convulsive aspect to Streisand’s movie that almost requires a bit of a bump up. The Mirror Has Two Faces’ entertainment value (both intended and accidental) make this film more worthy of a 60% rating. In this case the user ratings are obviously fueled by the legion of Streisand fans who refuse to own up to their icon’s mistakes. I’m not sure when I logged my rating, but I gave this movie 2 stars.

If one looks even closer to Rotten Tomatoes Logic, there is a really discordant level of confusion that occurs. I don’t know, maybe this makes sense for an art form that is so subjective. Film Art also has a strange way of aging. All the same, some of these ratings are simply disturbingly strange.

Is Unforgiven The Godfather of the Western?

Or is Unforgiven the Citizen Kane of the Western genre?

Is Clint Eastwood’s Western better than John Ford’s masterful, The Searchers?

Because within RT logic, The Godfather carries a 99%/98% shared rating between Film Critics and Users. Citizen Kane sits with a combo of 100%/90%. So in theory, both The Godfather and Citizen Kane are true cinematic masterworks. One would be hard-pressed to argue that either film is not deserving of very high ratings. I can’t help but wonder, if we are serious about ranking films, is Unforgiven so good that it is only 4 % points below The Godfather?

Films really do not get much better than this. But in Rotten Tomatoes Logic, this film is only 4 % points higher than Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven. The Godfather Francis Ford Coppola, 1972

Films really do not get much better than this. But in Rotten Tomatoes Logic, this film is only 4 % points higher than Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven.
The Godfather
Francis Ford Coppola, 1972

Further, as brilliant as this Orson Welles film is, can we say it is a “perfect film?” Maybe we can, though in all honesty, I feel that The Godfather Part II is a surprising one up on the original film. I’d also be very quick to point out that as great as Citizen Kane is, does it resonate both personally and artistically as deep as either of the first two Godfather films? I don’t think so.

I’d go so far to say that Hitchock’s Rear Window, David Lynch’s Blue Velvet, Goddard’s Breathless and Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver and Raging Bull are all slightly better films than Citizen Kane. From my perspective, the magic of Citizen Kane ties to the innovations that Welles so masterfully put into play so ahead of the cinematic curve. A crucial film, but 100%? John Ford’s The Searches is also essential and very influential, but is it worthy of RT’s 100% rating?

I don’t really like either of these movies. But I would assign a 75% for WarGames and a 70% for Short Circuit. I do not need to “like” a movie to see the talent, skill, intellect, and clear appeal for others. I do not enjoy Terrance Malick’s Tree of Life, but I am unable to dismiss it’s skill and use of style.

"You talkin' to me?" This near-perfect film carries 98% / 93% RT Rating. So just 3 % points higher than Unforgiven. Really? Taxi Driver Martin Scorsese, 1976

“You talkin’ to me?”
This near-perfect film carries 98% / 93% RT Rating. So just 3 % points higher than Unforgiven. Really?
Taxi Driver
Martin Scorsese, 1976

Now welcome to the perplexing ideology of taking an individual’s rating and averaging it in with others.

If one were to look at my ratings you would most likely find that taken within context of the way I approach rating films, you would discover that a 70% means that I think there is enough of value in a film for some others to enjoy. If I enjoy a film it is going to go more into the range of 85% to 95%. Essentially, if I like a movie enough to see it more once, purchase a copy of it or assist in restoration effort — that film will gain a high rating from me. A movie has to be really bad to get a total Thumbs Down from me.

Something that one would think is obvious, is actually not actually so. I never review / rate a film I’ve not seen. Not even professionals always follow this essential rule. Sad but true. As blogging has already become somewhat of a tired concept, other on-line means of information is taking on the more potent place to seek out new ideas and film comment. While Movie Holics tends to adhere to current film releases and normally more mainstream films, there are many other outlets and vloggers out there.

Another on-line critique that ventures into more esoteric terrain, is Brian Kish. Lo-Fi with both humor and intelligence. Always fun and laid-back style that offers insight and comedic delivery. A sort of Post-Modern Film Critic, Mr. Kish is having fun but the viewer is fully aware that he knows of what he speaks.

Post-Modern Film Criticism that manages to be comical, informative and intellectual all at one time. Brian Kish Barrel Bottom Reviews YouTube Channel

Post-Modern Film Criticism that manages to be comical, informative and intellectual all at one time.
Brian Kish
Barrel Bottom Reviews
YouTube Channel

His taste in film is more aligned with my own. He is re-visiting Classic Cinema with the eyes of Intellectualism as well as those with a current 21st Century Perspective. It is within the world of podcasts and vlogs that one is likely to find some of the most engaging Film Art discussion. Brian Kish’s Barrel Bottom Reviews are always fun to watch.

I was unable to secure his permission to post this link, but I doubt he will mind. Here he discusses Louis Malle’s brilliant collaborative effort, My Dinner with Andre:

https://youtu.be/YRe0ymvs0sU

Check out his perspective. This view-point is especially important to those of us who care about Film Restoration and Re-distribution. His delivery is also very entertaining. 

By the way, within the RT galaxy, My Dinner with Andre sits with a 91% Film Critic ranking and a general viewer rank of 86%.

Just for the hell of it, take a look at how these movies are currently rated on Rotten Tomatoes:

My demented and twisted father decided that he and I should see the “new” Bo Derek movie. I was 14. John Derek’s Tarzan: The Ape Man was one of the worst movies I had ever seen in a cinema. My father fell asleep. I kept wishing I could, but the movie was loud and Bo Derek was constantly winning, cooing and asking stupid questions to a jungle man who might have actually been dumber than her character appeared to be. This film currently holds a Film Critic Rating of 11% vs. User Rating of 21%.

Perhaps one of the all-time worst movies I have EVER seen in a cinema. My inappropriate father took me to see this mess. He fell asleep. Sadly, the cinematic torture would not allow me to sleep. Per Rotten Tomatoes, this mind-numbing badness rates 11%. That is still 2 % points higher than 2015's Fantastic Four. Seriously? Tarzan: The Ape Man John Derek, 1981

Perhaps one of the all-time worst movies I have EVER seen in a cinema. My inappropriate father took me to see this mess. He fell asleep. Sadly, the cinematic torture would not allow me to sleep. Per Rotten Tomatoes, this mind-numbing badness rates 11%. That is still 2 % points higher than 2015’s Fantastic Four. Seriously?
Tarzan: The Ape Man
John Derek, 1981

I do not have to see The Fantastic Four to know that it is a better film than this horrifying film error that remains Tarzan: The Ape Man. Bo Derek frolicking in the jungle with Tarzan is pure cinematic torture. No, it is not erotic. Just to be sure I actually watched this film again. It is actually worse than I remembered it.

Oh, and let’s not forget the ill-advised American Idol-inspired film, From Justin to Kelly.

OK, come on. Do movies get any worse than this? And, no. It is not camp. It is just bad.

American Idol goes to the movies. RT currently ranks it at 10%. This might be a little bit harsh. It was better than Tarzan: The Ape Man.

OK, come on. Do movies get any worse than this? And, no. It is not camp. It is just bad.  American Idol goes to the movies. RT currently ranks it at 10%. This might be a little bit harsh. It was better than Tarzan: The Ape Man... From Justin to Kelly Robert Iscove, 2003

From Justin to Kelly
Robert Iscove, 2003

So as Movie Holics pointed out, can any of us really agree that Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four really worse that the two movies listed above? Really? Is it that bad? 9%???? Mr. Trank’s film has clearly become some sort of odd Cinematic Whipping Boy.

This may be the lowest rated film to be green-lit for a sequel. Major Movie Studios are not always on target, but they clearly do not see this rating as “true” or “accurate.” If they did, Josh Trank would not be on the docket to direct the sequel. Fantastic Four is a classic example of what is wrong with Rotten Tomatoes.

 

 

Obviously, not a great or maybe not even a good movie. But is it deserving of RT's 9% rating?!?!!? Fantastic Four Josh Trank, 2015

Obviously, not a great or maybe not even a good movie. But is it deserving of RT’s 9% rating?!?!!?
Fantastic Four
Josh Trank, 2015

How in the world can this level of skewed ranking make any sense or inform viewers just how bad or how good a film is?

Matty Stanfield, 10.6.2015