Category: Reviews

Hereditary (2018)

In Theaters Now
Directed by: Ari Aster
Starring: Toni Collette, Alex Wolff, Milly Shapiro, Ann Dowd, Gabriel Byrne

**************SPOILERS IN REVIEW*******************

There are certain ways that will they/won’t they or did it/didn’t it stories can succeed. Unfortunately I’m not sure what those ways are, but I know it doesn’t have to do with continuity. The Sixth Sense isn’t great because you never see anybody but Haley Joel Osment talking to Bruce Willis. That just makes it neat upon a re-watch. Ari Aster’s debut film doesn’t bother with that “neat” factor, and even when you are told, pretty much point-blank, what is going on, you still question it. That is why Hereditary succeeds.

Hereditary tells the story of a family. A mother (Annie, Toni Collette) who works as an artist building and creating miniatures, a father (Steve, Gabriel Byrne), a teenage stoner son (Peter, Alex Wolff) and a 13-year-old daughter (Charlie, Milly Shapiro). Annie’s mother has recently passed away, the film opens up with an original idea, a text of her obituary. Annie as well as her mother, father, and deceased sibling all suffer from some form of mental illness. There are strong hints that her children suffer this same fate. It’s never explicit what they suffer from, but it’s some form of D.I.D., bipolar disorder, or dementia. So when the sinister story comes into play, you don’t know, for most of the film, weather or not it’s something seen as a viewer or seen through the eyes of one of the characters.

Toni Collette’s wardrobe changes to something from an “insane asylum all-white” collection as the questions regarding mental illness and evil come more into play (credit: imdb)

Things are escalated quickly when Charlie passes away in what is probably the most violent way I’ve seen a 13-year-old die in a movie. Her brother blames himself (and his mother) and both, to some extent, are indeed to blame. Then again, there is an odd symbol seen at the scene of the death (just before Charlie’s passing) that makes you think it’s possible that there are external forces at work.

Ann Dowd plays Joan. If that sentence alone doesn’t freak you out you should watch some more of Ann Dowd’s work. Joan is a really fun character. She meets up with Annie outside of a support group for people who have recently lost loved ones. Things quickly escalate when Joan shows Annie how she can connect with the other side. Her manic attitude toward talking to her deceased grandson is maybe the most uncomfortable I felt during the viewing. It’s during the climax of the film where you see Joan yelling at Peter and realize that you haven’t seen Joan talk to anybody besides Annie this whole time. Casting even more doubt on the evil at play.

The standout of the film is Toni Collette. The character of Annie has to show a range of emotion as wide as I can recall in recent memory, and plays a mentally unstable person as well as Jack Nicholson in pre-axe The Shining.

Toni Collette as Annie in Hereditary (credit: imdb)

First time writer/director Ari Aster impresses with story, plot, and direction skills. The use of light is nothing short of jaw-dropping at times and the games he plays with imagery are really fun. You aren’t sure if you are in the Utah residence (think the Overlook if it only could sleep 5 people) of the family or in a 2 square foot model of a hospital. It’s jarring just to see someone walk into a room at times.

The film ends with evil winning. I’m not going to spoil details. It wouldn’t add to this review and that is a lot of the fun (that feels gross) in Hereditary. But I will say this. You are told, without a doubt, that the super natural evil you have been learning about the entire film is real. And you STILL don’t know it to be true. The film plays with mental illness in a very aggressive and impressing way. And while I’m not sure I would recommend this to anybody, it definitely deserves to be seen by horror fans and art film fams alike. 

Is it Watchlist-Worthy? Yes – but don’t yell at me after…

Talkie Talk #89: Talk of Fame – Seven (1995)

Talkie Talk
Talkie Talk
Talkie Talk #89: Talk of Fame - Seven (1995)
Loading
/

Brent, Chris, and TJ debate both the merits and issues with David Fincher’s first good film, and ultimately decide if it belongs in the hallowed halls of the Talk of Fame!

> Direct podcast RSS feed: here! 
> Contact: email, Facebook (movies, TV, games), and Twitter!
> Check out The Media By Us Facebook Page too!
> Review us on iTunes, Google Play, or anywhere! 

 

Warning: Some mild language. Some language is picante.

The Cloverfield Paradox (2018)

Now available on Netflix
Directed by: Julius Onah
Starring: Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Daniel Brühl, David Oyelowo, Chris O’Dowd, Zhang Ziyi, Elizabeth Debicki

What is a Cloverfield movie? What is the connective tissue running through these Bad Robot produced properties? What makes an idea “Cloverfieldian”? The biggest question of all – does J.J. Abrams and the guiding production forces know anymore? Long story short, I’m not sure it matters. What matters is that Paramount didn’t think much of this, and sold it off to Netflix.

Netflix finally did it. In control of a massive streaming infrastructure, Netflix released 56 movies last year – most of which were released with minimal fanfare. In possession of the Spotify or Tidal of movies, they made waves on Super Bowl Sunday with a multi-million dollar ad, promising that a new Sci-Fi movie with Gugu Mbatha-Raw was coming out. And then they pulled a full Beyonce, and surprise-released the film, and it was immediately available. It’s a seismic chess move – one that created premiere-like excitement and mass-internet conversation with the original movie. No matter what, it’s a win for the format and a win for non-theater-goers.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmZhOWNjNmEtOWVmYi00NDQxLThjNmEtZGYyZDYwMzFmODY1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODExNTExMTM@._V1_.jpg
“Is that a Cloverfield out there?” (image: imdb)

The movie has two strands running artlessly through it. In one, Hamilton (Mbatha-Raw) and her husband Michael are stuck in a gas-shortage line, while the radio gives a backstory of worldwide food and energy crisis. Hamilton decides to volunteer for a mission that puts her in a space station for over a year, and Michael just stays and does Michael stuff, which include being a doctor and rescuing someone from a hospital and then staying safe – that’s it. The Michael stuff on Earth is rough. And it was pasted onto the movie after the fact, and has all the Cloverfield touches on it.

The more interesting part is what happens to Hamilton when she gets to the space station. There’s a clever montage to start where the one-year expectation gets stretched to many, many years. We meet the international crew, and they’re the biggest strength of the movie. The crew is in place to fire up a particle accelerator to find an infinite energy source, to help stave off the threat of a world war for the scarce resources on earth – they do so in space, because there is the potential to end existence. Chekhov’s particle accelerator.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZjI5ZDU2OWUtYjQ4Yi00NDZiLTllOWEtYzIwNTRiNzNlZDZkXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODExNTExMTM@._V1_.jpg
The Gang saves the day… Or do they? (image: imdb)

Hamilton is joined here by the American leader Kiel (Oyelowo), German chief engineer Schmidt (Bruhl), Brazilian doctor Acosta (John Ortiz), Irish interstellar scamp Mundy (O’Dowd), Chinese scientist (or engineer? Or mechanic?) Tam (Ziyi) and instantly suspicious Russian person Volkov (Aksel Hennie). It’s not that clear what everybody does, but they all have an interesting, lived-in dynamic as a team – the viewer is dropped in the middle of their relationships, which is nice. Chris O’Dowd is particularly fun (although he’s clearly in another movie) and everybody is generally very good. Then, Chekhov’s particle accelerator sets off and things get kooky. I won’t reveal all the hi-jinx, but suffice to say that interdimensional travel is involved.

The weirdest part of the kookiness is the nature of the differences they start to notice. Basically, the multiverse is like an omni-powerful Kevin McAllister, and the crew of the Shepherd (yes, the ship is called that) are the Wet Bandits. The multiverse is being pretty obvious that it wants these guys out of its alternate dimension, and unfortunately all the dimensional pranks play the same note over and over. There are some interesting spooks and some flair to the spectacle, but bear in mind that this was a small movie before Paramount retrofitted it with a Cloverfield skin.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZjU1OGE1ZmUtZTU3Zi00YjE4LWI4NzctY2YzOWQ3MmU5OTE0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODExNTExMTM@._V1_.jpg
This picture won’t change. What am I saying? It’s a picture, of course it won’t change. (image: imdb)

Young director Julius Onah has some fun things in the movie, especially with the production design in the ship, but in the end, you won’t remember this movie – I’ll straight up promise you that. The Cloverfielding of this movie is super clunky (the ending is the most massive scale eye-roll of the decade), but the Chekhov’s Accelerator part is not enough of a movie to stand on its own either. Cloverfield itself was a phenomenon in 2008, and rightly so – the first trailer was so arresting with the Statue of Liberty head bouncing down the street and cutting to no title, but a date. A better retrofit for the franchise was 10 Cloverfield Lane, which is clearly a seperate movie that wears the ending Cloverfield tangent suitably enough (though the best part of the movie clearly is the original part, when it was called Valencia). And here we are ten years later with another one. I have to imagine that timing is no coincidence, since the last anyone heard of this original movie (called The God Particle), it still needed work. It kind of still does. I’ll be more excited for a Cloverfield movie that was Cloverfielded from conception, rather than from opportunity.

In the end, the movie is nothing new or that interesting. If you liked Event Horizon, this is that, but it’s now. If you like your Event Horizon movies now-er than 1997, then you’re in luck, because this movie came out in 2018, which is as now as it gets. The now-est, in fact. And now, it’s got a Slusho reference and a Bad Robot credit.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZTkzOTgwYTktMGU2MC00ZGY1LTkzODYtOWRkYmY0Yzc0ODBiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODExNTExMTM@._V1_.jpg
You think this is from Event Horizon, but it’s not (image: imdb)

Is it Watchlist-Worthy? Not really – only for Cloverfieldian completionists.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Now in Theaters
Director: Martin McDonagh
Starring: Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell 

Frances McDormand and 2 of the 3 titular Billboards (credit: imdb)

Chris: Hi everybody! Thanks for joining TJ and I for our chat about the, at times wildly uncomfortable, but mostly enjoyable movie Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. It is perhaps my favorite movie of the year that features punctuation in the title. I really enjoyed it and thought it was a hoot. TJ, how did you feel, generally, about the movie (which we will hereafter abbreviate into something cutesy like 3BB)?

TJ: Fantastic. One of the best of the year so far. The only negative thing I have to say about it is that it was billed as a black comedy, when in actuality, it felt like a very serious, melancholic, drama, with amazing snippets of comic relief.

Chris: Yeah. I mean Sam Rockwell’s character is responsible for some of the funniest moments in the movie but is almost certainly the most troublesome character. He is so oblivious to anyone other than himself and his mom, he’s a bad cop, racist, sexist, and he’s the character who seems most ripped from a Coen brothers’ movie. What’d you think of Rockwell’s performance (or anyone else that really shined)?

TJ: The acting all around is what I would write home about. Frances McDormand cements herself here. She’s one of the best of our time. Sam Rockwell and Woody Harrelson also boost their already fantastic resumes. There’s a chance that this movie has iconic roles for three superstars when we look back on it years from now. Not to mention the great supporting cast. Lucas Hedges, John Hawkes, Abbie Cornish, and Caleb Landry Jones were all great. I was a particular fan of Sandy Martin. Her appearance is another thing that makes us feel like this should be more comedy than drama when it’s just not. You know her from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, but her role here as the mother to Rockwell is heartbreaking and real.

Having said all that…McDormand steals the show when she’s on screen.

Chris: Absolutely. My favorite scene is Frances McDormand and Lucas Hedges in a quick back and forth featuring one of Martin McDonagh’s favorite 4-letter words. Also, McDormand’s “I am become death” attitude is phenomenal. You forgot to mention Peter Dinklage, whose arc is that of a bullied admirer of McDormand’s character. He’s really great as well. I can’t think of a performance that felt phoned in. Samara Weaving was hilarious as John Hawkes’ new boo. He, by the way, is also great, and REALLY intense.

So the acting rocks… what did you think of the overall story? Seem pretty typical for a McDonagh film?

(FOR ANY READER, THIS IS YOUR SPOILER WARNING, AND THIS IS A MOVIE THAT COULD BE SPOILED)

Sam Rockwell, Frances McDormand, and Zeljko Ivanek in the Ebbing Missouri Sheriff’s Office (image credit: imdb)

TJ: Loved it. On the surface it’s a story about grief and recovery. Then it becomes so much deeper. McDonagh does a fantastic job at showing you that the Police Chief (Harrelson) is a multi-layer character. And if that isn’t hard enough to pull off, he does it with Officer Dixon (Rockwell). He’s a “if it ends with -phobic he’s probably it character” and gives him life. It’s a character study of all the residents in this small town with the disappearance of Mildred Hayes’ daughter as a catalyst. The billboards are a MacGuffin for more than just the protagonist. Everyone just wants something different out of them. They are there so we see the true colors of these characters.

Chris: I listened to a podcast recently where someone mentioned that the script is only 86 pages for a 2 hour movie. What efficient story telling. Seems like the kind of script that McDonagh gravitates toward. In Bruges is similarly paced where everything revolves around the titular city while all of the work happens within the dialog of a fairly small cast. The city Bruges is an important symbol to Gleeson, Farrell, and Fiennes that has a different meaning to each whereas in 3BB there are words literally printed on them that state Hayes’ attitude.

Speaking of his prior works, do you have a ranking of his movies? Have you seen them all?

For me it’s In Bruges > 3BB > Seven Psychopaths

TJ: This was actually my introduction to McDonagh. Really excited to go see the other two. And the Oscar Winning short from 2004, Six Shooter.

Chris: I think In Bruges, for me, is a Talk of Fame nominee. Anyway, is there anything else you want to cover before we go live with this?

TJ: One more question. Is this a perfect movie? If not, what about it isn’t good?

Chris: Hmmm. Perfect movie is hard. I don’t buy into the criticism that there is too much moral ambiguity in the characters. I think that people are morally complicated and 3BB does a good job at portraying it.

So maybe, yeah. I am wracking my brain trying to think of something. And I guess it would be that if you are REALLY sensitive to uncomfortable situations then this isn’t for you. But that’s just not true for 99.9% of the population. I would blindly recommend it to pretty much everyone.

What do you think? Did you have something in mind?

TJ: If I have to pick something it’s probably that some of the ancillary characters aren’t necessary for the story they are telling. Specifically Peter Dinklage and Caleb Landry Jones. They don’t seem to affect the story as it progressed. They were just little side stories. They were interesting, and acted well, but I’m not sure they were important enough to be told. They didn’t tie in to our three main characters they way everybody else did.

Chris: I agree about Dinklage, but the CLJ story helped build the universe. He was also the perfect “fuck authority” foil for Hayes and also target for the Ebbing PD.

Any parting thoughts so we can wrap this up?

TJ: Fair point on CLJ. He had some good chemistry late with Rockwell as well. Just a fantastic film that I’d absolutely recommend to anybody over the age of 18…

Chris: Agreed. I would also recommend it to all. Anyway, thanks for chatting with me TJ.

TJ: Fo sho.