2020s, 2021, A+, Animation, Anime, Comedy, Drama, Grade, Past, Review, review-movie, Year

Film Review: Pompo the Cinephile – 2021

April 28, 2022 The Critic 1 Comment

Director(s)	Takayuki Hirao
Principal Cast	Hiroya Shimizu as Gene Rinka Ôtani as Natalie Konomi Kohara as Pompo Akio Ootsuka as Martin
Release Date	2021
Language(s)	Japanese
Running Time	90 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

In Nyallywood (aka Hollywood), the producer who reigns supreme is Pompo, an exuberant young woman with a flair for dramatic entrances and an eye for nabbing the best talent to surround her; her B-movies are a thing of legend and accrue rewards and adulation all around. Her assistant, Gene, in shocking comparison to Pompo, is a tired looking, unenergetic husk whose only saving grace seems to be his intensive love of cinema. Far from just being part of his job, Gene uses cinema as his primary frame for interacting with the world at large around him, spending his free time poring over copious notes he’s taken regarding the production process or watching and absorbing films at breakneck pace.

Consequently, even in his day-to-day outside of the studio, he finds himself framing the world as a director would. While travelling to an routine casting session, he notices a young woman running across the street. As she playfully jumps past a puddle, his pupil transforms into a camera lens, showing us how the seemingly small moment becomes something cinematic; time slows down and his brain starts doing post-production (color grading) to the moment of jubilation, applying colors and filters to the everyday moment thereby rendering it cinematic. A simple jump – a split moment – becomes frozen in time and becomes something greater than it is.

When he finally makes it to the audition area, he runs past the girl once again; this time her face is covered with a miasma of despair – a sharp contrast to before. As the two cross one another’s paths, discordant jump cuts are used to create a stutter effect- time breaks as the two seemingly unrelated persons enter one another’s space. It becomes clear that their paths are meant to cross, even though Pompo informs Gene that the young woman, Natalie, was rejected from the studio’s current film due to an inability to act.

But inability in the moment does not entail incapacity in general, and Pompo decides to spring a surprise on Gene: she offers him the chance to serve as director for her new script, a non-B effort titled Maister. The script – a story of an elderly hardened man learning how to embrace the world via a chance encounter with a young, passionate woman – immediately captivates Gene who finds himself completely enamored with the characters in spite of the generic trappings of the narrative. To his surprise, Pompo reveals that the part of the heroine is to be played by none other than Natalie. Even though the aspiring ingenue’s test performance lacked, a certain aura she possessed captivated Pompo to the point of writing the role in this script explicitly for her; like Gene, Pompo can’t help but take the inspiration from the everyday and transform it into something cinematic.

Thus, Gene is set to direct his first feature film. Suddenly, the never-ending series of notes he’s taken on sets up till now become a template for him to traverse down the path to becoming a full-fledged director. However what opposes him is not a direct antagonist or series of enemies to be defeated but the process of creation itself; getting shots to work in spite of production issues, keeping true to the vision of the script while heeding to cinematic limits, conveying key story beats without relying on excessive exposition, and finding a way to edit down the final product in spite of a wealth of gorgeous footage become the obstacles that Gene and his crew find themselves tackling.

By structuring the film proper around the mechanics of the film-making process, director Takayuki Hirao is able to get the viewer to directly consider each and every choice made. There’s a direct focus on the nature of what makes a good film: decisions related to acting, shot composition (ex: wide shots vs close-ups), and editing are brought up directly by the characters as they discuss how to overcome the various hurdles they encounter. By having the characters walk the audience through the logistics of their decision-making, the film is able to get viewers to subjectively tap into and become involved with the film in a dialogue. Our attention is drawn to the nature of cinematic technique and its intended purpose, so as the film starts to become more “overtly” stylized, it becomes astoundingly clear that even the most seemingly minute decision is being done to engender a certain feeling.

Match cuts (both within Pompo and between Pompo and Maister ), jump cuts, rewinding/fast-forwarding footage within the film proper to explain parallel character decisions, using reflective surfaces in the background to juxtapose characters’ thoughts versus their actions, and moving the camera back from supposed establishing shots to reveal said scenes are nothing more than character perspectives or scenes being projected on the big screen reveal the liminal space between cinema and memory. Not since the works of Satoshi Kon (Millennium Actress, Perfect Blue) has an animated film so effectively tapped into the idea of cinema as a dream-machine; for the characters this dream is both literal – they want to produce and create films for audiences – but is also metaphorical as these same films are expressions of their innermost desires come to life, rendered on a canvas that promises infinite possibilities.

As Gene shoots Meister, he finds that his own life not only serves as a template for how he approaches the content but that the content then, almost as if in response, becomes a guiding force for him to evaluate and progress within his own life; life and art become two mutually reinforcing sides, generating a new creative order. While there are similar works like Keep Your Hands Off Eizouken! or Shirobako that also navigate the process of creatives attempting to take their fanaticism to the level of art, what separates and elevates Pompo and its themes is the level of commitment at making the fictional work its about, Maister, as polished and entertaining as the film proper. Even though we’re only privy to brief snippets, the scenes chosen are all pivotal in how they reveal the underpinnings of the story proper while conveying a completely distinct tale that’s enthralling all on it’s own. It’s one thing to cheer on a character as they set out to pursue their dreams, but by making the painful, brutal costs and transcendent rewards of their efforts so transparent, Pompo is able to hammer its points home.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Pompo the Cinephile is a love letter to cinema and animation that emphatically demonstrates the ethereal powers of moving images. The film’s unabashed enthusiasm and wit makes it endlessly entertaining and endearing for anyone who’s ever “found” themselves in a work of art.
Rating	10/10
Grade	A+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2020s, 2022, B+, Black-Comedy, Grade, Past, Review, review-movie, S+, Science Fiction, Thriller, Year

Film Review: Dual – 2022

April 21, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Riley Stearns
Principal Cast	Karen Gillan as Sarah / Sarah’s Double Aaron Paul as Trent Beulah Koale as Peter Maija Paunio as Sarah’s Mother
Release Date	2022
Language(s)	English
Running Time	95 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

A young man (Robert Michaels) rushes to a table stacked with weapons. He struggles to select one of them but during his moment of indecision an arrow flies past him. While he may be indecisive in picking his combat option, his opponent is not. A crowd cheers to the violence; this duel is a public spectacle.

The young man finally decides to act, evades the arrows that are fired at him, and moves towards his opponent before proceeding to butcher the latter with a knife. The camera moves to the corpse which is identical to the young man we’ve been cheering for; this has been a fight between doppelgangers. An announcer comes forward to congratulate the victor and asks him whether or not he’s the original or double. The young man responds that he’s the double and he is subsequently crowned the “true” Robert.

Thus, the stakes are set. In this world, doubles of persons exist and there are Battle Royale like duels between them to determine which one of them can stake their claim to being the “real” person in question. Identity, far from being a given, is a social marker that must be fought for. Furthermore, the doubles are well-defined, empathetic persons who seek to survive and not the pale imitations of an original one might expect. Dual intentionally opens from the perspective of the double instead of the original Robert to position the viewer behind them; we naturally cheer for the character we initially identify with and so when it’s revealed that they’re a “double” who has “stolen” their life from an original, our empathy is turned on its head. While it seems proper to cheer for someone fighting for their life, a double fighting their original in an attempt to subsume the latter’s life and identity along with it presents its own set of ethical issues. The same action becomes framed from two perspectives one of which is predicated on the idea of one owning their own identity and the other on the idea of one owning their own life; the schism between life and identity is what Dual seeks to explore.

The story cuts from the newly crowned Robert, to a young woman, Sarah (Karen Gillan), who seems to be living her worst life. Her apartment is saturated in depressing blues that make telling the time of day impossible. Her mom (Maija Paunio) constantly calls and messages her, interrupting any attempt at alone time. Her partner, Peter (Beulah Koale) is off at work and seems to be uninterested in conversing with her. Her only form of interaction with the world comes from the blue screens of her phone and laptop illuminating her face. It’s clear that Sarah is alienated; there’s no vitality to be found as she passively engages with a world that seems to ignore her angst.

But she soon learns that she’s contracted a terminal disease and is guaranteed by her doctor that the chances of surviving are 0%. Consequently, Sarah is offered an opportunity to replicate herself and create a double to live on in her place after her passing. The procedure is marketed a gift to be given by the soon-to-be deceased to their living friends and family as a way of taping over the grieving process; it’s fine that your special someone has died because you can live with a clone formed from their DNA.

Despite being unable to afford the procedure herself, Sarah signs on when she’s informed that her double, upon assuming the role of “Sarah” on passing, would then be responsible for the payment plan responsible for their genesis. Sarah has nothing to worry about because she’ll be dead. Sold on the idea, she signs on and meets her double, aptly named “Sarah’s Double” soon after.

While the latter questions her source on “their” shared interests and hobbies in an attempt to better emulate her, it becomes apparent Sarah and her double are not the peas in a pod promised by the advert. The double seems to have opposite tastes in food, entertainment, and aesthetic style. If she’s supposed to serve as a stand-in for Sarah’s friends and family, she seems to be a poor fit. Yet, Sarah’s mother and Peter seem more than okay with Sarah’s Double, reacting to her with a sense of warmth and energy that fly in direct contrast to the treatment Sarah had to deal with. She comes to realize that far from taking her place upon death, her double has decided to make the transition early and take over as fast as possible.

Thankfully, or so she thinks, Sarah learns that her incurable terminal illness has somehow gone into remission. As a result, she’s allowed to put in a request to decommission her double. However, her double appeals under a newfound amendment to the constitution to “stay” and continue living as “Sarah”. Consequently, the original Sarah is locked into a duel to the death for the privilege of existing as “Sarah”. The opening becomes reframed as a death knell; if doubles are capable of winning in brutal fashion and celebrated for doing so, then the outgoing and more energetic Sarah’s double seems more than certain of defeating the lethargic, unmotivated Sarah.

By channeling the essence of Yorgos Lanthimos’s (Dogtooth, The Lobster) brand of surreal humor – deadpan delivery of serious lines meant to call attention to the absurd nature of the situation with accompanying stoic reactions – director Riley Stearns forces the viewer to focus on the nature of the identity problem inherent to Dual instead of the logistics or theatrics of the situation. This is a story that’s more curious on the logic by which identity can be stripped and gifted by personal, social, and legal entities, revealing the contingencies upon which identity furnishes itself. As Sarah is forced to deal with her impending duel, she’s’ made to reckon with the dual nature of the lives her double and her live.

She starts as a woman sentenced to death who willfully accepts the same and decides to live by extension through a double. Her double does what she’s advertised to do and brings a love and warmth to Sarah’s loved ones that Sarah herself finds herself unable of producing. Upon realizing that she’ll survive, Sarah tries to kill via decommission her double and “take back” her life, a life which we know is in sharp contrast to the one she had lived up to the point. Once Sarah is challenged to the duel, she starts training to survive a battle to death for a life with people who want nothing to do with her as she is; in this vein, the identarian battle takes on a metaphysical character wherein Sarah’s double comes to stand-in as Sarah’s persona. Sarah is forced to tackle the source of her alienation – the disjunct between what she is and what she thinks she ought to be – in a literal battle.

However, while the film excels at demonstrating how Sarah navigates the contours of her personal life, it falters when it comes to connecting those aspects of her identity to the overarching bureaucratic forces that she’s forced to navigate. One of the running themes of the film is how Sarah’s day-to-day existence is structured around capitalistic institutions: the treatment she pays for is expensive and relies on a perverted extended payment plan, a lawyer to represent her, monthly fees to her double until the time of the duel, monthly payments to her trainer Trent (Aaron Paul), on top of everyday bills. Yet, the film never opts to show how she makes money, opting to tell the viewer about her financial struggles instead of showing or embellishing them. These moments would have not only given context to her struggles but would have also helped tie the larger thematic movements of the film with Sarah’s personal journey. This lack of cohesion between the minor and major aspects of Sarah’s life make the subversive gestures Dual tends towards less poignant. Instead of appreciating the way the narrative unfolds, this lack of an obvious “bigger” point might frustrate viewers who don’t want to grapple with the sardonic presentation the film opts for.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Riley Stearns’s Dual might miss the mark for viewers looking for a clear, hefty film with messages to gleam through, as its exploration of a battle between original persons fighting their clones for the former’s identity takes on a cerebral, sardonic tone that operates via subversion and suggestion, but it should satisfy those viewers attuned to the absurdist comedic leanings of Yorgos Lanthimos’s works.
Rating	8.6/10
Grade	B+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2020s, 2022, Action, Adventure, Black-Comedy, Comedy, Grade, Review, review-movie, romance, S+, Science Fiction, Year

Film Review: Everything Everywhere All At Once – 2022

April 9, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Dan Kwan Daniel Scheinert
Principal Cast	Michelle Yeoh as Evelyn Ke Huy Quan as Waymond Stephanie Hsu as Joy James Hong as Gong Gong Jamie Lee Curtis as Deirdre
Release Date	2022
Language(s)	English Mandarin Cantonese
Running Time	139 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

NOTE: This is a new release and the review is based off a theatre viewing. This means the review won’t feature common elements like visual analysis, extended theme analysis, or long-form discussions of the cinematic techniques being used. Once I am able to get a copy of the movie to watch, pause, analyze, and get stills from the review will be updated to match the current site’s standard.

The film opens on a mirror reflecting Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh), her husband Waymond (Ke Huy Quan), and their daughter Joy (Stephanie Hsu) singing a song in joyous aplomb. However, a jarring match cut reveals an empty reflection in the mirror; the family is no longer singing and the warmth is missing. The camera pushes into the mirror to the Wang family’s present-day day situation.

Evelyn sits stressed at a table sorting through a host of receipts, bills, and other crumpled paraphernalia; the Wang family is being audited and their laundromat is now under the threat of being repossessed. As she deals with the stresses of stabilizing the family’s financial future, Waymond attempts to articulate his own feelings. But he’s constantly interrupted by Evelyn at each juncture. She’s obsessed with ensuring that Chinese New Year celebrations go well this year because her judgmental father Gong Gong (James Hong) is present and she doesn’t have the bandwidth to process any seemingly auxiliary requests coming her way. Unfortunately for her, Waymond’s concerns are more severe than she thinks with his mind headed towards divorce due to the constant neglect.

When Evelyn goes down to deal with problems at the laundromat on top of everything else, Joy comes in and brings up the issue of introducing her girlfriend, Becky (Tallie Medel), to Gong Gong. But Evelyn refuses to directly answer at first, fritting around the store in a mad dash to finish off all her tasks. Far from the opening’s joyous singing, there’s a cacophony of complaints, expectations, and misgivings at the Wang residence.

But on top of the familial discord, an inexplicable situation arises with Waymond. The camera pushes in on the laundromat’s security-dam dashboard in the background and brings to attention Waymond undergoing a possession-like event. His body jitters and then he does a flip over a table; clearly this is a different person.

Meanwhile, Evelyn finally shoots Joy’s request down and tries to defend her decision by saying that Gong-Gong is from a different time, so such news would be too much for him to handle. Consequently, when the family goes down to the IRS office, their main translator and point-of-contact in their daughter is not there with them; the family’s internal lack of communication bleeds over into their external world, making it harder for them resolve the seemingly much larger problems looming over their lives.

Evelyn, Waymond, and Gong-Gong make their way to the IRS agent responsible for their case, but on their way up on the elevator, Waymond’s body jerks as it did previously and he acts in a completely different manner, going so far as to block the elevator camera with an umbrella. He tells Evelyn that he is another Waymond, that the world is in danger, and gives her instructions to follow at a later time. Initially, she chooses to ignore his instructions but as her tax case agent, Deirdre (Jamie Lee Curtis), gets more intense and makes the Wang’s financial situation seem fraught with imminent doom, Evelyn decides that following the instructions might at least provide a reprieve from the situation she finds herself in.

Suddenly, a dolly-zoom like effect is employed where Evelyn finds herself thrust back into a moving frame, creating a kinetic dissonance. Her body snaps back against the wall and the frame fractures like a broken mirror, reflecting multiple Evelyn’s, each with their own perspective, each in their own location; mirrors, which had so far just been part of the set reflecting the Wang family now become enmeshed within the frame proper, tying form to content. One of the Evelyn’s take control of the frame and meets the Waymond from the elevator who reveals that he’s another universe’s Waymond that was temporarily inhabiting (our) Evelyn’s universe’s Waymond, and that he’s been sent to find an Evelyn capable of fighting a threat bent on destroying the multiverse. Thus, a simple trip to settle taxes turns into a Matrix-styled battle for multiversal survival where Evelyn must, in her role as chosen-one, bring balance by taking down a supreme evil set on absolute destruction.

However, directors Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert (the Daniels) use the idea of multiple universes to explore multiple genres, tasking each entanglement with a universe with its own genre settings and trappings. Consequently, as characters traverse their own and current universal perspectives, they’re forced into distinctive genre entanglements, or more accurately genre miscommunications. Early on after initially being given the run-down of the situation, Evelyn finds herself face-to-face with a target she saw in another context as being hostile and acts out like an action hero in self-defense; but the target is far from hostile and is their “normal” self, so the misfire between their drama and Evelyn’s action lends to a genuine comedy of errors.

This is how the film is able to so effortlessly traverse different moods and emotions at the drop of a hat; genre becomes ever-fluid, crystallizing into serious or comedic whenever the narrative calls for it. The most disparate situations flow into one another seamlessly without sacrificing or compromising on narrative momentum . At one point the film becomes an action-comedy Jackie Chan styled and at another adopts the trademarks of one of Wong Kar-wai’s romances with shutter-speed experimentation that isolates the relevant characters and neither moment is out of lockstep within itself or within the larger story at play. Even though each of these tales is done within the confines of its respective genre, going so far as to have the actors modulate their performances, sometimes in minute fashion, to be hyper-authentic to the feeling of the homage(s), their contextual narratives are essentially just recapitulations of the main, overarching narrative about finding meaning in an existence that seems to constantly spit at one’s face.

By couching the Wang family’s respective struggles within distinct genres, the Daniels are able to break down how the problems the family finds themselves are far from disparate and in actuality stem from the same underlying conditions. Even as the film zips from universe to universe with a staggering number of match-cuts, dolly zoom-like disorientation effects, and shifting aspect ratios, the central story never gets lost because the script is careful to keep the emotional underpinnings of what the characters are going through consistent even as the contexts they find themselves inhabiting vary. In this sense, the film warrants a comparison with Terrence Malick’s masterpiece The Tree of Life, in its ability to couch a simple, individual story of a family within a grander universal context such as to suggest transcendental truths while respecting the different ways they may manifest within different, subjective lives.

However, what makes Everything Everywhere All At Once feel unique in spite of its obvious homage and reference and grander aspirations and achievements, is its wholehearted embrace of obscene, vulgar jokes as a way of both retaining the Daniels flair for humor in the vein of their previous film Swiss Army Man but more importantly as a way of hammering home the point. Overcoming the constitutive void of nihilism that permeates existence and butt-plug humor go hand-in-hand in the Daniels’ world of infinite possibilities as they try and demonstrate that the difference between two worlds is nothing more than a question of perspective.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Everything Everywhere All At Once is somehow a quaint slice-of-life story of a family coming to terms with their personal and familial struggles and a multi-universal epic about saving the universe from a catastrophic, all-encompassing nihilism that obliterates everything it comes into contact with that feels wholly consistent with itself, being equal parts riotously hilarious, thoughtfully introspective, and emotionally resonant.
Rating	10/10
Grade	S+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

1990s, 1992, Action, F, Fantasy, Grade, Horror, monster, Review, review-movie, Year

Film Review: Winterbeast – 1992

April 8, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Christopher Thies
Principal Cast	Tim Morgan as Whitman Mike Magri as Stillman Charles Majka as Charlie Bob Harlow as Mr. Sheldon
Release Date	1992
Language(s)	English
Running Time	77 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

Whitman (Tim Morgan) stares at the disfigured man.

Sergeant Whitman gazes upon a person smiling on a chair. Despite being privy to the person’s face from the start of the scene, Whitman only reacts in aghast to the deformities on the person’s face when the film cuts to a face reveal for the audience. Out of nowhere, a stop-motion skeleton figure makes its appearance and we cut to Whitman reacting in an increased panic at the spectral entity; there is no effort made to incorporate both the live action and stop-motion visual into one scene and Whitman’s reaction is the only connective tissue letting the viewer know this is all taking place in the same environment. To add to the chaos, the deformed person starts to rip at his own flesh. This disturbing sequence is then revealed to be Whitman’s nightmare as he tosses and turns in bed.

However, instead of easing the viewer in to the story by showing the sleeping character, Whitman, waking up and confirming the vision before getting to their day-to-day, Winterbeast instead chooses to cut to another equally out-of-context nightmarish scene, this time of a skeletal creature coming out of another man’s stomach. Then, the story cuts to two completely different characters, Ranger Stillman (Mike Magri) and Dick (Bill MacLeod), providing the viewer no context by which to ground that which came previously. Whitman eventually shows up to the station and is informed by Stillman, who we learn works for the former, that Dick, an on-goer, found one of Whitman’s other rangers, Bradford (Lissa Breer), abandoned in the mountain and was unable to find another ranger, Tello (David Mica), accompanying her. The group makes plans to investigate the trail the next day.

Suddenly, the scene changes and we cut to a completely different woman. She gets undressed in her abode when another stop-motion creature, a large tree, enters the area she’s in. A slasher-styled P.O.V shot is used to show the creature approaching the woman. He reaches and grabs her from her room; the film opts to transform the woman into a stop-motion figure to keep visual consistency with the tree-monster. The monster then slams the woman’s body against the wall, seemingly killing her.

This haphazard cutting from and to scenes with whiplash-inducing changes in perspective are par for the course in Winterbeast, a fascinating movie that operates on pure kinetic momentum and nothing more. Continuity in narrative or within scenes matters less than entertaining at every stop along the way which is why the movie constantly meanders from point to point with a loose reverence for earlier narrative threads ; the focus is always getting to the next moment of violence, context be damned. The structure of the movie diverges very little from this opening structure: the characters gather information about, or seemingly about the disappearance and then a different stop-motion creature kills another character, usually unrelated to the story outside of their carnage candy role.

If there is a larger overarching plot, it’s about Whitman and company trying to circumvent a Jaws mayoral-like figure in the form of the town lodge’s owner, Mr. Sheldon (Bob Harlow), who refuses to close the lodge down despite the mystery surrounding the disappearance and the resulting supernatural phenomena. Unfortunately, while the plot synopsis seems like a springboard to jump off of, Winterbeast makes very little use of it. Nothing in the story is built up enough to generate an investment on the part of the viewer. The characters have very little to say to one another in the ways of motivation or traits, the different monsters/creatures that the story utilizes have no coherent overarching identity or relevant differentiable characteristics, and the acting is so far removed from the spectacle that it becomes impossible to care about what’s happening outside of sheer curiosity.

Whitman (Tim Morgan) and Charlie (Charles Majka) talk in a Natives decorated room.

There’s an attempt to couch the mystery within a Native Indian dressing that even goes so far as to suggest one of Whitman’s friend’s, Charlie (Charles Majka), is a stand-in for Natives within the context of the story, but then does nothing to explain or relate any of the violence or the mystery proper to the Natives outside of the most superficial sense of possible; they might as well not have been in the the movie at all which is a shame because the proximity to the Natives is one of the only consistent visuals in the mise-en-scène.

Without any genuine way to relate to the narrative, all the movie has going for it is the spectacle, and the quality of what it has to offer is inconsistent at best. Outside of the general incongruity resulting between treating the pure stop-motion scenes and the live action as part of the same environment, the sound design is severely disorienting. While the movie tries to use its soundtrack in the vein of Halloween to ratchet up the tension and create a feeling of the dread, it fails to evoke the slightest sense of unease ; because the track often noticeably cuts before looping back in on itself during longer scenes, any notion of tension immediately dissipates and the audio becomes farcical. This feeling is exacerbated by poor sound mixing; the score and/or background-noises like the wind or leaves become so loud as to obscure the dialogue or one another, culminating in scenes where the impact of any.

In spite of that, where director Christopher Theis and producer Mark Frizzell’s Winterbeast succeeds is in its sheer dedication to presenting a cinematic “something. Just like Obayashi does in House, they impart such passion to presenting a vision, albeit a vision that seems incomprehensible by most measures, that one can’t help get caught up in at least appreciating the effort. For all its issues, if there’s one thing Winterbeast is not it’s lacking in passion. Where other teams might see the inability to properly incorporate their stop-motion creatures with the live action nature of their shooting and subsequently can the creatures in lieu of something more tame, this movie opts for the full vision, no holds barred. If the people and monsters can’t mingle directly, then P.O.V shots and stop-motion people will have to suffice; it’s better than fully compromising on the spectacle of what-could-be.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Winterbeast is a movie of pure passion that’s put together with no other purpose than to stay consistently entertaining. It sacrifices narrative coherence, thematic resonance, character development, and even visual continuity to ensure that spectacle upon spectacle can be presented; the movie so fervently goes for broke in trying to do something that in spite of all its failures its not a miserable experience. Echoing the poster tagline, the movie “must be seen to be believed.”
Rating	1.5/10
Grade	F

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2020s, 2022, A+, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, slasher, Year

Film Review: X – 2022

April 5, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Ti West
Principal Cast	Mia Goth as Maxine / Pearl Jenna Ortega as Lorraine Martin Henderson as Wayne Gilroy Scott Mescudi as Jackson Owen Campbell as RJ Brittany Snow as Bobby-Lynne Stephen Ure as Howard
Release Date	2022
Language(s)	English
Running Time	106 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

REPORT CARD

TLDR	X is one of the best slashers to come out this side of Wes Craven’s Scream, deconstructing the slasher sub-genre in a fresh new way while relishing in its gory fun. The film’s navigation into the intersections of art, sexuality, reality along with the clever nods to the horror genre at large make it a must-watch for genre fans looking for a great time while providing enough heady material for viewers wanting to do a deeper-dive on the material.
Rating	10/10
Grade	A+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2010s, 2017, C+, Drama, Fantasy, Grade, Past, Review, review-movie, romance, Year

Film Review: Twilight – 2008

February 6, 2022 The Critic 1 Comment

Director(s)	Catherine Hardwicke
Principal Cast	Kristen Stewart as Bella Swan Robert Pattinson as Edward Cullen Billy Burke as Charlie Swan Taylor Lautner as Jacob Black
Release Date	2008
Language(s)	English
Running Time	121 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

The film opens on two stories that intertwine, that of a young woman and that of a doe. While the doe drinks from a stream, the young woman, Bella (Kristen Stewart), notes that while she’s never given death much of a thought, dying in the place of a loved one wouldn’t be a bad way to go. Suddenly, the doe notices that its peaceful drinking area is no longer safe. We cut to a point-of-view shot – a a human-shaped hunter has appeared and death is staring the woodland creature down. Though it tries to run, the incredibly fast hunter catches it. Death has come.

The connection between the two tales is apparent: both feature a creature facing an inevitable end. If the doe is a stand-in for Bella, which loved one is it dying in the place of? If Bella is fated to be like the doe, then what exactly is hunting her? This deadly juxtaposition sets the tone for what’s to come. Bright light fills the screen and we’re transported from the woods to the deserts of Phoenix.

Bella begins to narrate again, describing the journey leading up to her confrontation with death. She explains that her mother is planning on going on the road with a new partner. As a result, Bella’s moving from sunny Phoenix, Arizona to cloudy, rainy Forks, Washington to stay with her father, Charlie (Billy Burke), the police chief of the town.

However, just because her new environment is cold and unappealing doesn’t mean that the people inhabiting it are; Bella finds herself immediately accepted by the townsfolk. Her father’s peers fondly remember her from childhood visits and her fellow classmates at school, especially the young men, are desperate to make acquaintances with a newfound person; Forks is a small town with a sparse population so new faces are rare.

The Cullens from left to right: Jasper (Jackson Rathbone), Alice (Ashley Greene), Emmett (Kellan Lutz), Rosalie (Nikki Reed), Edward( Robert Pattinson).

But the Cullens, a family of five adopted siblings, each with immaculate good looks and pale skin, ignores Bella, giving her a cold shoulder. The lack of attention provokes an interest; Bella is immediately entranced by the one member of the family, Edward (Robert Pattinson), who seems equally interested in her.

The fan blows Bella’s (Kristen Stewart) scent towards Edward.

Yet, it appears that his interest is one rooted in antagonism. As Bella makes her way into biology, the fan at the front of the room blows against her. Edward visibly grabs his face, gagging in response to Bella’s scent. The tension becomes worse after the teacher has Bella sit next to Edward to serve as his lab partner. His disgusted facial reactions prompt Bella to check her own body odor. Far from wanting to be her friend, Edward seems offended by her very presence.

After class he leaves to go to the front office in an attempt to get switched out of Bella’s class but is informed that there are no other vacancies. The severe rejection boggles Bella; she can’t fathom why Edward seems so desperate to avoid her. Her suspicions only grow after Edward skips school for a few days. Would he really skip out just to avoid having to deal with her in any capacity?

Bella (Kristen Stewart) can’t stop thinking about…

In spite of this, Edward comes to occupy Bella’s thoughts. She can’t get him out of his head and his increasingly erratic decisions only causes her to become more obsessed with what’s provoking such a strong response from him. Instead of hanging out with newfound friends who seem genuinely interested in her, Bella becomes determined to figure out the mystery behind Edward, a mystery that only becomes more confusing as Edward decides to randomly warm up to her after the cold introduction.

Her search and the implications behind what she discovers bifurcates the film into two neat halves; the first half follows Bella as she unravels Edward’s secrets and grows to fall in love with him, and the second half follows her as she deals with the consequences of her discoveries, both of Edward and of her feelings.

Bella’s journey is presented primarily from her point-of-view; she’s constantly narrating her inner thoughts and the film often cuts to her dreams and subjective visions. This helps ground the more melodramatic moments of her journey; the rush to die for love is a sentiment that exists as extremity but in the context of a young woman’s first romantic encounter, the melodramatic intensity of every related moment is understandable. The story’s supernatural backdrop only accentuates these moments, giving the emotional intensity Bella’s going through a fitting real-world analog to deal with.

Unfortunately, the film doesn’t meld these layers cohesively against one another during the visceral moments. Inconsistent and comic visual effects undercut the severity of the supernatural forces encroaching Bella’s life. It’s hard to take threats seriously when the effects render what should be a threatening situation into a comedic one. Consequently, the melodramatic nature of the young couple’s feelings for one another feels more absurd than it does heightened.

Furthermore, the acting by the leads often feels discordant with the emotions that their characters are trying to hint at. This is partially a problem that stems from the script which adapts most of the book’s dialogue, dialogue which very few actors could possibly render in cohesive let alone great fashion, but it definitely would have helped if some of the facial expressions matched up with the intention behind the dialogue.

In spite of this, Twilight never feels like its settling or meandering. Even when the film swings and misses in stellar fashion, the attempt can be appreciated. The fantasy the movie provides and takes Bella through can be comprehended even though it’s not nearly as appealing as Bella makes it out to be.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Twilight’s tale of intense passions and supernatural romance may be overbearing at times, but the enthusiasm by which it approaches its subject matter makes it more than endearing. Though some of the visual and acting choices don’t land, the intent behind the fantasy of the story is comprehensible and fans of it will be more than satisfied with the offering.
Rating	7.2/10
Grade	C+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2010s, 2017, Action, Comedy, Crime, D, Grade, Past, Review, review-movie, Year

Film Review: The Hitman’s Bodyguard – 2017

February 2, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Patrick Hughes
Principal Cast	Ryan Reynolds as Michael Bryce Samuel L. Jackson as Darius Kincaid Élodie Yung as Amelia Roussel Gary Oldman as Vladislav Dukhovich Salma Hayek as Sonia Kincaid
Release Date	2017
Language(s)	English
Running Time	118 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

A photo of Amelia (Élodie Yung) and suits.

The film opens with a series of split-screen shots depicting the routine of Michael (Ryan Reynolds), a private bodyguard for the wealthy and powerful. He puts on his watch, picks out a suit from his collection, drinks some coffee, gets his weapons, and kisses his partner, Amelia (Élodie Yung) on the cheek before departing his scenic abode. The split-screen shots demonstrate the rigid order he lives his life by; every moment is part of an elaborately planned sequence.

He picks up his client, Takashi (Tsuwayuki Saotome) and proceeds on pace for a secure delivery. Takashi gets on his plane and Michael waves him off with a smile. But right as the plane is about to depart, Takashi is shot and murdered.

Despite all precautions, Michael finds himself with a client down; he’s in shock. While his men run around him to take hold of the situation, Michael stares dumbfounded, unable to come to terms with his failure. Two years pass and his expression remains the same – the weight of his past remains. He escorts an drug-addled client in dejected fashion; clearly he’s still good at his job, but the loss of a client has certainly hurt his reputation as security detail, so he’s forced to take on much worse clientele.

Michael (Ryan Gosling) agrees to Amelia’s (Élodie Yung) deal to protect Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson).

While Michael tends to his mundane everyday life, his ex-girlfriend and current Interpol agent, Amelia, is tasked with escorting a notorious hitman, Darius Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson), to the International Criminal Court to give witness testimony against Vladislav Dukhovich (Gary Oldman), the dictator of Belarus charged with counts of genocide and ethnic cleansing. But on their way to the court, Amelia’s convoy is attacked; far from being a secret, their movements have been leaked to outside attackers. Amelia and Kincaid momentarily team up to get out of the area, but now they must find a way to get to the court without Interpol’s help. With no else left to turn to, Ameilia phones Michael and asks him to help transport Kincaid.

Michael is initially reluctant to help. On one level, he doesn’t want to deal with Amelia due to their break-up. On another level, due to the nature of his work, he’s found himself on the opposite side of Kincaid many times, often having to keep his clients protected from the hitman. There’s a clear antagonism present in the group. But Amelia promises to help reinstate Michael’s company’s security rating through her government connections if he gets Darius to the court on time to testify. Thus, the reluctant duo between hitman and bodyguard is born.

Unfortunately, the plot that follows goes exactly as one would expect: a love-hate relationship is formed by the duo who ribs and endears themselves to one another over the course of their trip all while they survive increasingly elaborate attacks by Dukovich’s party. Though disappointing, the narrative would be fine if it at least served as a vehicle for stylized action sequences or entertaining character moments, but none of these moments ever bear fruit because the movie would rather tell than show.

The visual creativity from the opening never happens again which is a shame because the primary antagonism between Michael and Kincaid is how they orient themselves towards planning. While Michael is rigid and disciplined, Kincaid is very much the opposite, opting to play situations based on how they proceed in the moment. Consequently, when the character’s find themselves dealing with a threatening situation, they tend to have different reactions; Michael thinks something out and tries to stick by the book while Kincaid goes for the clearest immediate option available. Instead of demonstrating this visually like he does in the opening, perhaps by shooting Michael’s character with split-screen shots to showcase the sequential planning and Kincaid’s character with jump cuts to demonstrate the haphazard movement, director Patrick Hughes opts for standard coverage of the duo as they deal with their problems. We don’t get to see the difference between the characters manifest in poignant fashion and are forced to gleam the essence of their relationship through their conversations.

This proves to be an issue because most of the dialogue is insipid and insists on the basest humor to get a laugh. Ryan Gosling and Samuel L. Jackson may be talented actors, but there’s only so much they can do when most of their conversations end in a punchline about smelling like ass. This type of humor is uninspiring on its own but contributes to a serious tonal whiplash when the story jumps from these jokes to scenes of the primary antagonist planning/committing genocide and genocide-related activities.

All of this culminates in a general feeling of disengagement. There’s nothing to get invested in. The characters are placeholders for the story that give their actors little room to breathe life into the narrative. The jokes are indexed to the lowest common denominator of humor and undercut any sense of tension or gravitas. Even though the action scenes are shot competently and give a clear sense of what’s going on, you don’t care because there’s nothing to cling onto.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	The Hitman’s Bodyguard is a movie that lacks any sense of personality or identity worth investing in. The aggregation of safe buddy-cop story beats provides very little entertainment as even the most minute action is predictable. Even the comedic stylings of the leading duo can’t give the movie a pulse as the script insists on having them repeat the worst punchlines to jokes repeatedly.
Rating	D
Grade	5.5/10

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2010s, 2012, A, Action, Adventure, Grade, Marvel, Past, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, Superhero, Year

Film Review: The Avengers – 2012

January 27, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Joss Whedon
Principal Cast	Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark / Iron Man Chris Evans as Steve Rogers / Captain America Tom Hiddleston as Loki Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner / Hulk Chris Hemsworth as Thor Scarlett Johansson as Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow Jeremy Renner as Clint Barton / Hawkeye
Release Date	2012
Language(s)	English
Running Time	143 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

Marvel title card.

Marvel title card dissolves in the flames of the Tesseract.

A hooded figure narrates to an unseen usurper.

The opening sets the stage for what’s to come. The title card dissolves into the Tesseract which becomes the focal point of the sequence. There’s a universal scope in this story as we see alien figures plotting an invasion of the Earth in search of the cosmic cube. The rhythmic fades to black create a foreboding effect and as the camera pushes into the Tesseract, it becomes clear that intergalactic conflict is coming.

The title sequence starts with the Marvel logo prominently in the center of the screen. The camera pulls back from the logo which becomes encompassed by blue flames, flames which are revealed to be the core of the Tesseract, the cosmic item recovered by S.H.I.E.L.D in Captain America: The First Avenger. The screen fades to black.

A voice mentions that the “Tesseract has awakened” on Earth. The camera pans up an elaborate, alien staircase where a hooded creature bows to an unseen figure. The creature, the narrator from earlier, continues and claims that an informant who is intimately aware with the cube will claim it for them. The screen fades to black.

The informant in question is handed a glowing scepter. Another fade to black.

Then an army of armored alien creatures, the Chituari, start to roar as the narrator guarantees that the informant will take the Earth as compensation for retrieving the cube, using the army of Chituari to take control. Upon retrieving the cube, the unseen figure will rule the universe. A final fade to black.

Once again, the Tesseract takes center stage and the camera starts to push into it. This is an opening that makes it clear from the get-go: The Avengers is more epic than the films that came before. The rhythmic fades to black induce a sense of a grandiose force building up. The alien world and set-piece confirms that this story is taking place against a much grander backdrop. As the camera pushes in through the Tesseract, to the planet of Earth it becomes clear that worlds are going to collide.

Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Clint (Jeremy Renner) talk about the Tesseract.

A S.H.I.E.L.D base is being evacuated as a helicopter arrives at the facility. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) steps out and begins to head into the building that everyone else is running out of. He runs down to the testing facility overseen by Dr. Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård) where tests are being run on the Tesseract. Selvig explains that Tesseract is active and is taking action of its own accord, setting off fluctuations and discharges as it pleases. Clint (Jeremy Renner), the agent overseeing the experiments, tells Fury that any disruption on display is not due to any party on “this” side. Suddenly, it becomes clear. If the Tesseract is a doorway, then it reasons that it can be opened from two sides. One side might be on Earth, but the other side is somewhere else entirely and is raring to invade the planet.

On cue, the Tesseract discharges a bright blue light, opening a portal to another location. The informant from earlier makes their appearance in spectacular fashion, completely shifting the feeling of the room. We cut to a close-up and learn that this intruder is none other than Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor’s (Chris Hemsworth) brother who we had been led to believe was dead at the end of Thor. The questions begin to pile up: How did Loki survive? Who hired him? Why do they want the Tesseract so badly?

Loki takes control of Clint (Jeremy Renner) using the scepter.

But Loki’s not concerned with giving any answers, and he quickly takes charge of the situation, blasting agents with his scepter and laying waste to the highly, secure government building. He turns his scepter to both Selvig and Clint’s chests and takes control of their minds; they switch allegiances immediately. Fury is easily handled and the Tesseract is stolen from the premises but not before the cube releases one last burst of energy, destroying the facility in its entirety.

For the first time in the franchise, Fury is thoroughly trounced and left beaten. He declares an emergency and tells his agents to begin looking for the cube. Loki’s attack means that the world is now at war and needs to prepare. One of his subordinates, Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg), asks what they can hope to do. The Avengers theme starts to play in the background as the title card drops as a response. Fury’s answer is a given: it’s time to assemble to the Avengers, a task force made up of individuals capable of mounting a resistance to forces that conventional might cannot stand up against.

But far from being a solution to the Loki problem, creating the Avengers brings about a whole host of other issues for Fury because the rag-tag set of individuals he seeks to have work together are far from cooperative. Given the persons that Fury wants to involve with the project, namely the heroes of the previous Marvel films, it’s easy to see how problems could stack up. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is a ego-maniac who can’t help but demonstrate just how smart he is. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) of is a man so afraid of himself that he’d rather live his life as a wanderer than be near people and risk harming them as the Hulk. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is a man haunted by the loss of his past and is desperate to do anything to numb those sensations. Thor might be fond of the Earth but his priorities lay with Asgard and its people. Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) only shows true loyalty to Fury and is more than willing to pull one over on people to achieve any given mission. Meanwhile, Clint Barton is compromised and controlled by Loki.

Balancing these personalities isn’t easy, but director Joss Whedon successfully manages to plot a narrative course that lets the characters bounce off each other authentically. The characters act as we would expect them to given their previous cinematic depictions; the fun emerges from watching the sparks between the characters we know and love getting to experience the same level of familiarity with one another. It’s clear that the actors are enjoying themselves and play off one another seamlessly, so it’s hard not to get invested in the burgeoning friendships. As bonds begin to form between members at a more personal and at a larger ensemble level, the various narrative threads from the previous films start to make sense as a larger puzzle. The group feels less a collection of arbitrarily selected heroes and more like a naturally forming assemblage. Consequently, even when the technical maneuverings of the plot feel outlandish, the energy on display by the key players ensures that no moment remains dull. This is a narrative that knows how to keep a steady hand on the momentum and keep the viewer engaged.

The film’s formula is so effective that it’s effectively served as the de-facto template of the franchise ever since. A story of a diverse group learning to work together maps well with the depths of the Marvel Universe, offering any minor character from a previous film a chance to reprise a more important, embellished role in a future entry. Learning to fight together means that the narrative can be built around multiple fight set-pieces; have the heroes get a minor win, then suffer a loss of sorts, before finally coming together and achieving a victory of sorts. Progression can be clearly marked and delineated which makes character arcs easier to notice and subsequently appreciate.

Yet, The Avengers remains unique even after a decade filled with films taking inspiration from its formula because there’s an earnest enthusiasm in its construction. Long one takes and extensive use of spectator reactions to the spectacles gives the film a distinctive visual identity that many other entries in the franchise are missing. The characters also all have a distinct sense of personality; they’re not all quipsters, so when characters like Tony make a snarky remark, those moments register because they operate in contrast to otherwise “straight” dialogue. This makes the humor hit harder and the serious events linger for a moment of reflection. While the seams sometimes crop up – an inevitability given the film’s duty in patching together every previous Marvel entry – concerns regarding them melt away due to the sense of wonder and enthusiasm on display.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Even a decade after it’s release, The Avengers still entertains due to the spontaneous and organic way it mixes the founding Marvel cinematic characters and their respective story threads. The foundational super-hero ensemble film demonstrates that any character can find new purpose if helmed in another story and that characters from seemingly different, developed worlds can come together in a coherent manner in which the sum is greater than the parts. The film’s ambition has paid off multiple-fold, establishing the basis of the largest cinematic franchise the world has seen to date.
Rating	9.0/10
Grade	A

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2000s, 2001, Adventure, B+, Family, Fantasy, Grade, Harry Potter, Past, Review, review-movie, Year

Film Review: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets – 2002

January 22, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Chris Columbus
Principal Cast	Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley Emma Watson as Hermione Granger Robbie Coltrane as Rubeus Hagrid Richard Harris as Albus Dumbledore Kenneth Branagh as Gilderoy Lockhart Tom Felton plays Draco Malfoy Jason Isaacs as Lucius Malfoy
Release Date	2002
Language(s)	English
Running Time	161 minutes
Report Card	Click to go to Review TLDR/Summary

Harry looks at a picture of Lily (Geraldine Somerville) , James (Adrian Rawlins) , and himself.

Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) looks down at a photograph from his past of his parents holding his younger, infant self. Even though he can’t remember the moment, the magical image conveys a liveliness that he yearns for; the “lost” memory reflects off his glasses emphasizing its power on him. Then he flips the page. An image of him with his best friends, Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), takes center page. But unlike his previous reaction, there seems to be less of a longing here; the image isn’t reflected off his glasses and his reaction is more muted. Why the distance towards his friends? Given the adventures the trio shared during their first year at Hogwarts, the difference in temperament is even more pronounced.

Suddenly, Hedwig, Harry’s owl, starts to fidget in its cage, causing quite a ruckus. Harry tries to calm her down and explains that her entrapment is his extended family’s decision and not his. Harry may not be stuck in a cup-board any longer, but his connection to the magical world which sustains him is limited and constrained; the Dursley’s might not have been able to stop him from going to Hogwarts but they certainly won’t let him mention it or anything related to it.

Hedwig’s outburst doesn’t go unnoticed and Vernon (Richard Griffiths) calls Harry downstairs regarding it. He goes downstairs where Vernon, Petunia (Fiona Shaw), and Dudley (Harry Melling) await. Vernon reminds Harry that the night is crucial to Vernon’s success; he’s hosting his boss for dinner and requires that Harry to remain completely silent – out of sight and out of mind – until said company has left. Outbursts like Hedgwig’s are unacceptable. Harry attempts to barter; if Hedgwig only had some time to fly free, she would be less agitated and noisy. But the Dursley’s push back and claim that Harry would such opportunity to reach out to his friends. Harry sadly notes that he has received no messages from any of his friends so sending anything back to them shouldn’t be a concern. His detachment when viewing the earlier photograph becomes clearer; he feels isolated and forgotten.

He trudges back up to his room, condemned to a night of silence but comes upon a creature on his bed; the creature introduces himself as Dobby, a house-elf assigned to a wizard family to serve as their magical servant. Dobby warns Harry that nefarious events will take place at Hogwarts for the upcoming year and urges the young wizard to take the year off and stay home. But Harry pushes back; he mentions that his home is no home at all and that he needs to see his friends.

Dobby retorts that Harry’s friends are no friends at all if they don’t even write the young wizard. Alas, the information gives the house-elf away. Harry questions how Dobby would know such information; Harry had only explained as much to his extended family a few moments earlier. Sheepishly, Dobby reveals a host of letters from Ron and Hermione and explains that he intercepted and hid the letters in hopes that isolation would cause Harry to lose interest in Hogwarts. Understandably, Harry gets irritated and makes a grab for the letters.

Harry( Daniel Radcliffe) exchange words.

But Dobby escapes and runs downstairs to where Vernon and company sit. Harry freezes. Dobby realizes the stakes and offers Harry a deal: stay at home and agree to not go to Hogwarts or watch as the desert Petunia made for the evening drops on one of the guest’s heads. Harry pleads but Dobby doesn’t relent and casts a spell with a snap of his fingers; the cake starts to float up and moves towards the guests. Harry tries to catch the cake before it falls but instead ends up getting incriminated for the incident as the desert falls right as his hands get around it.

Unsparingly, Vernon does not take the debacle well and places additional bars around Harry’s room. Forget going to Hogwarts. Harry is no longer even allowed outside and is kept prisoner in the Dursley household; his room is little more than a jail-cell.

Ron (Rupert Grint) comes to break Harry out of his prison-styled room.

Thankfully, Ron and his brothers make their appearance to break Harry out in their flying car. They latch the bars onto the enchanted vehicle and rip them off. The disturbance wakes the Dursleys who burst in and try and stop Harry; Vernon grabs his nephew’s legs as the latter gets into the car, but he’s unable to maintain his grasp and falls onto some shrubbery as the car flies away. Harry and company make way to the Weasley household where the former is completely entranced by the difference between Wizard and non-Wizard life. Pots and pans clean themselves while needles knit clothes without any help. It’s a house of utter magic. Finally, Harry feels at home.

Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) uses Floo Powder.

He gets acquainted with the rest of the Weasley’s and sets out to Diagon Alley with the group. However, as a wizarding family, the Weasley’s travel to the location not by normal means of transport but by Floo Powder, a substance which when used in a fireplace can transport a user to a fireplace at a named location. Ron demonstrates the method of transportation before Harry is told to have a go at it. But a mispronunciation on Harry’s part has him landing in a different location, Knockturn Alley, an environment which exudes a dark malevolence in contrast to Diagon Alley’s warmth. As Harry is accosted by dodgy folks looking to take advantage of a young, lost wizard, Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) shows up and helps him out.

Harry is led to Diagon Alley where he meets Hermione. Just like she did in The Sorcerer’s Stone, Hermione casts a spell to fix Harry’s glasses before taking him to the bookstore where the Weasley’s wait. However, Harry’s fame has only grown since his first foray into the wizarding world and he’s recognized by Gilderoy Lockhart (Kenneth Branagh), an up-and-coming author, who capitalizes on the opportunity to do a photo-op with the young wizard. Suddenly, Harry is rushed forward and forced to become part of a publicity stunt he wants no part in.

Lucius (Jason Isaacs) confronts Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) as they leave the store.

As Harry tries to exit the store, he’s accosted by Draco (Tom Felton) and Draco’s father, Lucius (Jason Isaacs), who both notice him due to the unwanted attention from earlier. Once again, Harry is rendered an object of interest as the elder Malfoy exhibits a great curiosity in Harry given the latter’s role in exterminating the Dark Lord; Lucius lurches forward and examines Harry’s scar – the proof of the aforementioned exchange. The camera tilts as Lucius leans inward; the fascination with the mark of darkness is a sign of dark things to come. The confrontation dissipates and the parties make their respective ways.

Unfortunately, Harry’s trials and tribulations are only starting, and he finds himself caught in a web of deceit and mystery from the moment he makes his way back to school. As history starts to repeat at Hogwarts, Harry finds himself tasked with not only getting to the bottom of the school’s past but his own as well, all while dealing with a maze of ever-shifting allegiances that will have him questioning who’s really friend or foe. Just from it’s opening, it’s clear that this second installment in the Harry Potter franchise is darker, richer, and more thoroughly consistent than what came before.

In many ways the start of the film mirrors the way The Sorcerer’s Stone picks up. In both films, Harry is locked away by the Dursleys, he’s saved by a magical ally from his past, he’s taken to Diagon Alley where his past is commented on, and he even gets his glasses fixed by Hermione. But far from being emulation, The Chamber of Secrets embellishes each of these moments with a connective tissue that enriches the piece as a whole; the mystery driving the story rarely takes a backseat which gives the narrative a cohesive feeling. This is why the film can adopt the same slice-of-life approach as its predecessor, chronicling different sections of Harry and his peers’ lives over the school-year, without feeling as disjointed. The threads behind the mystery are set up from the very start of the story, so there’s a throughline to hang onto even when the pace it feels like its lagging.

Fluffy looms over Ron (Rupert Grind), Hermione (Emma Watson), and Harry (Daniel Radcliffe).

Director Chris Columbus also improves upon the overall look of Hogwarts with much improved CGI that makes the magical encounters feel far more authentic. If Dobby wasn’t enough proof, there are multiple CGI creatures that interact with the cast in believable fashion. This impact can be felt most prominently in the third act when all the different elements come together in thunderous fashion.

This is exactly what a sequel should do: build upon what came before without undermining it. If The Sorcerer’s Stone established that a world of magic could exist hidden under the world we know, then The Chamber of Secrets explores just what such a division would engender. If the Dursley’s are Muggles ^[1] The in-universe term for non-magic persons. who abhor wizards, then their magical opposites must also exist: wizards who detest Muggles. With parties on both sides aware of the other, the mechanisms governing the worlds, both in relation to one another and internally within themselves, are intricate, and Harry is just starting to scrape the surface of what lies beneath.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets expands on the magical world of Harry Potter in great fashion, delving into the backgrounds and darker underpinnings of Hogwarts as an institution. Director Chris Columbus improves on the original film’s formula with a tighter ,darker script and much better CGI/practical effect incorporation. It’s a more engrossing journey from start to finish.
Rating	8.6/10
Grade	B+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

2010s, 2015, C+, Grade, Horror, mystery, Past, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Thriller, Year

Film Review: Insidious: Chapter 3 – 2015

January 19, 2022 The Critic Leave a comment

Director(s)	Leigh Whannell
Principal Cast	Lin Shaye as Elise Rainier Stefanie Scott as Quinn Brenner Dermot Mulroney as Sean Brenner
Release Date	2015
Language(s)	English
Running Time	98 minutes
Report Card	Click to go Review TLDR/Summary

The title sequence starts in typical Insidious fashion: the credits are written with blue letters that dissipate in ethereal fashion before violent instrumentals punctuate the soundscape and the ominous red title card comes into frame. More blue text indicates that this third chapter in the franchise is a prequel to the first two movies. Then the text fades to a black screen which explodes in a burst of white light; the light becomes a skyline where birds fly around and the camera moves down to street-level. A young woman, Quinn Brenner (Stefanie Scott), walks down the street towards a house.

She knocks on the front door and an elderly woman, Elise (Lin Shaye) comes to answer. Quinn indicates she’s heard of Elise’s psychic powers and consultations and requests help with a supernatural affair. Elise responds in the negative and explains that her days of psychic entrepreneurship are over. Nonetheless, the sincerity of Quinn’s pleas moves Elise and she offers the would-be-customer a chance to come in and talk.

Quinn explains that she’s lost her mother some time ago and thinks that the latter is communicating with her. Since the occasion, she’s become insistent on reaching back out; it’s clear that her mom served a critical role in her life and confirmation of such contact would help Quinn find a firm footing in life. Elise gets swept up in the admission and begrudgingly offers to help Quinn try and contact Quinn’s deceased mother.

Elise turns out the light and begins delving into the realm beyond, but it becomes clear that something is going wrong. The camera pushes in from behind Quinn; something is coming. She turns and looks behind her and senses an unseen presence in the room. It’s clear that the wrong specter has heard the call. Elise’s face contorts in pain and she stops the séance, indicating that such occupational dangers are the reason she’s left the profession. The retired psychic turns to Quinn and warns the latter to stop reaching out for her mother because any message to one of the dead can be heard by all of them, and as the two just witnessed, some of the specters from beyond are more than willing to cause harm to those who call to them.

Alas, now that the other side has heard Quinn’s call and knows her of the depths of her longing, it’s not going to let her go so easily. Dark forces slowly infiltrate her life and begin to wreak havoc, leaving her bruised and damaged in her journey to find her mother. Unable to deal with the supernatural shenanigans, Sean (Dermot Mulroney), Quinn’s father, contacts Elise to help with the situation. The psychic is thus forced back into the fray and must confront her own inner demons as she seeks to stop the demonic forces that currently threaten Quinn’s life.

Unfortunately, for fans of the franchise, the film’s status as a prequel makes the journey to come predictable; the fate of pivotal characters is already known, so a sense of tension is missing. The script doesn’t account for this in any fashion, opting for inoffensive and tried story beats to generate a baseline level of interest in what’s to come. At one level, the story spends little time in building up Quinn or her family; the relationships between members of the Brenner family never get pushed or stressed in ways that would give the characters something for the viewer to latch onto.

Meanwhile, Elise, who serves as a secondary hero in the story, is given very little to do, which is a shame when Lin Shaye is one of the better actors here. The journey of a psychic so scared by the darkness of the astral world that she seals her own power is one that has so much ground to traverse, but instead of giving Elise room to grow and understand her role, the story prods her to her foregone conclusion with little demonstration of Elise’s decision-making process.

Consequently, the narrative, though coherent, offers very little space to latch on. It’s a vehicle for frightening set-pieces. But just like the story, these set-pieces are lacking a vitality or ingenuity that sets them apart from traditional haunted-house fare. A character will notice something is wrong. A presence will show up. The character will look around for them and then BOOM. A loud jolt along with a “creepy” image and the sequence is done. While both Insidious and Insidious: Chapter 2 have “jump scares” in them, both films employ them in measured manners that lets them have an impact. They build up to their scares through a chaotic sound design which never gives the viewer a moment to rest or predict what’s going to come next. In contrast, Chapter 3 opts for the same audio design for each of its set-pieces which makes them feel more chore than scare.

The problem is frustrating because it’s clear that director Leigh Whannell is competent at the technical aspects of nailing suspenseful sequences. There are multiple moments where the tension builds naturally as entities enter the background quietly. There’s a time given to let a reaction build up. But instead of riding the momentum and delivering on the subtle and eerie nature of what’s going on, Whannell opts to go for bombastic and showy spectacles. This might be forgiven if, like Chapter 2, Chapter 3 utilized the metaphysical trappings of its universe to set-up visually distinctive spectacles, but it never manages to tap into the same visual possibilities. It’s telling when the first two entries bathe their supernatural sequences with hellish reds and astral blues and this entry only makes use of the color scheme at the start and end of its narrative. In fact, outside of some events in the third act, there’s very little here to distinguish the film as an entry in the franchise; it could have just been a supernatural story with no connection to what came before.

In this sense, Insidious: Chapter 3 is frustrating not because it’s particularly bad in any one way but because it never manages to embellish an identity for itself – a disappointment given the potential the mythos of the franchise offers. By opting for the safe and simple choice at most turns, the narrative never manages to endear itself to anyone looking for something deeper than just a simple and technically competent supernatural story.

REPORT CARD

TLDR	The third chapter in the Insidious franchise lacks the identity or charisma that made the previous entries, namely the first film, mainstays of the horror genre. The set-pieces and narrative never make use of the metaphysical possibilities inherent to the franchise, opting for conventional set-ups and trappings at every turn. While this may be entertaining for the viewer looking for a simple, conventional supernatural outing, those hoping for something unique and engaging should look elsewhere.
Rating	6.9/10
Grade	C+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

The Critic's Sanctum

Film Review: Pompo the Cinephile – 2021

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Dual – 2022

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Everything Everywhere All At Once – 2022

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Winterbeast – 1992

REPORT CARD

Film Review: X – 2022

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Twilight – 2008

REPORT CARD

Film Review: The Hitman’s Bodyguard – 2017

REPORT CARD

Film Review: The Avengers – 2012

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets – 2002

REPORT CARD

Film Review: Insidious: Chapter 3 – 2015

REPORT CARD

A place for fun and rumination