This Week In Film (3/8/21 - 3/14/21)

 

March 8, 2021 - March 14, 2021
 

Hello new week, I  bought a Panisonic Lumix G85 camera and took it out for a test drive. I've been debating this camera for months and finally took the plunge. As it is COVID times, my test drive was multiple set ups around the house and filming myself in a routine. I remember in film school it was called a narrative moment. It is simply following an action. In film school we shot a 16MM film about two people playing chess, one cheating, and the other throwing the glass pieces on the floor. Each shot moved the 'narrative' forward, but it was mostly about matching your cuts. I wanted to test out the color grading, kit lens, and natural settings on the camera so I shot in 4K 24fps. My routine of choice was to take a shower, so yes, that means the first footage I shot on my new camera was me being naked and taking a shower. It's not the first time I've filmed my own shower. I'm sure it won't be the last either. It made me start wondering why it was my go to, but then I realized it is extremely difficult to act in the shower. It is like the one place where your facade washes away and it's the real you. The weird faces you make when you wash your armpits or how you inexplicably sing, let water fill your mouth, and spit it upwards only to allow it to land back on your face. Try recording yourself drying off. Believe me, when you watch it, there's no way you'll keep a straight face. But that's not what I came here to tell you about...

This Week In Film where I create a weekly rundown of the random sh*t I watch. There’s a HIGH / LOW at the end of this entry, so if words aren't really your thing, you can scroll quickly, look at pictures, and skip to my favorite viewings of the week.

Lets begin...

OVERVIEW:

PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK (1975)

dir: Peter Weir

Continuing our cinematic education, Katie and I decided to go with Picnic for our Australian New Wave choice. In the running was Nicholas Roeg's Walkabout (1971), The Cars That Ate Paris (1974), Stone (1974), Long Weekend (1978), and Mad Max (1979) but in the end we chose this hypnotic Valentine's Day film. 

The novel on which Picnic at Hanging Rock is based was written by Joan Lindsay who crafted a piece of historical fiction that felt as detailed as historical fact. She wrote the story with ambiguity in each page, and Peter Weir was able to translate that feeling to the screen. The effects of the film continue to linger with audiences and artists. This is most prominently seen in Sofia Coppola's The Virgin Suicides (1999) as the Libson sisters are nearly mirror reflections of the students of Appleyard College. Miranda from Picnic and Lux from Virgin are cut from the same cloth as both are shown with an ethereal quality reserved only for them. 

It's Valentine's Day 1900, and the students of Appleyard College are taking a field trip to the local geographical landmark Hanging Rock. The formation of Hanging Rock is a mamelon created by magma pouring, cooling, contracting, and splitting into monoliths. The students are told not to explore the rocks. But Miranda along with Marion, Irma, and Edith defy authority and begin climbing. As the students explore, something causes them to faint. When they come to Miranda, Marion, and Irma continue into the caverns of Hanging Rock. Edith screams from an unknown fear and runs back to the teachers. The rest of them go missing and are never seen again - well most of them, but saying more would spoil things. The film utilizes stunning cinematography where often veils or silks were used over the lens to create a softness to the images. There are moments of beauty juxtaposed with a haunting score that always reminds us there is a strange presence in the film. This presence is never identified but is always supposed to be felt.

NIGHTMARES (1983)

dir: Joseph Sargent

Segments: "Terror in Topanga," "The Bishop of Battle," "The Benediction," "Night of the Rat"

Hello again Mr. Sargent, so we meet again. I have a lot of love for Taking of Pelham... and absolute hatred for Jaws: The Revenge (1987). As one would assume this film between the two falls right in the middle. I enjoy it for what it is, an anthology horror film. By 1983 the anthology film was firmly cemented as a horror genre of its own. Nightmares had to follow in the footsteps of Roger Corman's Tales of Terror (1962), Dr. Terror's House Of Horrors (1965), Asylum (1972), Tales From The Crypt (1972), Dead of Night (1977), and Creepshow (1982). Coming after Creepshow is a tall order for any anthology film, and if we were to compare, Nightmares would fail. But, I tend to be a stickler for details when it comes to dating a film. I understand that when a film is released it can be drastically different from when the film was made. You need to look no further than Grizzly II made in 1983 and released in 2020. It appears that Nightmares changed hands a few times, but it was originally created in 1981 for a TV series, Darkroom (1981-1982). This gives Sargent's film the upper hand to Creepshow.

In this Creepshow-less universe of 1981, is Nightmares worth praise? I believe so. We have an anti-smoking ad that includes a rehash of 'the killer in the backseat' urban legend, budget bursting computer graphics in a Tron-less world, a Devil truck that tunnels its way out of the ground and flies through the air, and a large destructive rat with telekinesis. What's not to love? It seems a bold choice not to have a wrap-around story, and it is an element that is sorely missed. I've seen this film numerous times on cable and VHS growing up. I haven't revisited for years, but the segment I have always remembered is Emilio Estevez battling the arcade game. I guess as a teen, he was the easiest to identify with. I wasn't a married woman seeking out a carton of cigarettes, nor was I a priest without faith, or a husband and wife with marital problems. I was this angsty kid who enjoyed punk music and video games. Now, with this rewatch, his segment is terrible. I understand the dating of the computer graphics, but even if he was playing [insert newest game title here] the story would still suffer from inertia. I get it. He's addicted, and it's taken over his adolescent life, then he gets sucked into it. Be careful what you wish for... Blah Blah Blah. Emilio does get to deliver this over-the-top gem: "You sit there and make judgements about me. You don't know me!"

 

LAST HURRAH FOR CHIVALRY (1979)

dir: John Woo

"You said you just wanted revenge. You lied!"

Early John Woo showcases kinetic action sequences with his signature slo-mo shots that will continue throughout his career. Chivalry has it all: cage fighting, fancy swordplay, courtyard vistas, candle rooms, burning man Kung Fu, crotch stabbing, literal back stabbing, double double crossing, inexplicable flying, ninjas, a Kung Fu technique named Sleeping Sword that you perform... while sleeping, and a strong theme of honor. While the drama plays a little slow, the battles make this film worthwhile. You should always look at the distance between the cuts in a martial arts film. A scene held in a long shot for a decent duration will tell you everything you need to know about the competency of the actors and the choreography. This is where Chivalry shines: long takes of pure Kung Fu.

HALLOWEEN: INFERNO (2020)

dir: James and Vince Coleman

I cannot give this fan film high enough praise. I know the moment you mention 'fan film' some people cringe. While I'm with you a lot of the time, this is one of those exceptions. I've been hunting for great fan films since I first saw Never Hike Alone (2017) and its prequel Never Hike In The Snow (2020). When handled properly, these films feel as though they fit within the cannon of previous work. Inferno is a different beast. First, it answers the question how did Michael get caught in 1978 after Loomis shot him and he disappeared - if we are to follow the Halloween (2018) plot. And it gives us a possible side story to the I-can't-take-the-wait-any-longer Halloween Kills (2021).

After showing Michael caught, we jump to moments after the Strode ranch goes up in flames. Michael is loose and on a rampage. Readers, I implore you, THE KILLS ARE WORTH IT! While there may be a few issues with audio levels, dialogue, and acting in some places, none of that matters when these no-budget (I actually don't know the budget) effects look so good. Also, on a technical level, the digital cinematography is fantastic. The color grading is beautiful. And stay around for the post-credits scene because there's an EPIC drone shot. I enjoyed this so much, I'm going to embed it below but if that doesn't work here is the link.

MUNCHIE (1992)

dir: Jim Wynorski

While I may have only watched about thirty minutes of this thing, I feel fully confident I can review it. I'm sure I missed out on the subtleties of the plot and probably some stand-out performances. Maybe I'll review the portions of the movie I didn't see. So Munchie flew a pizza from a restaurant to his window and then attempted to save the life of a pre-teen. Saving the kid's life involved beating up a bully, changing his grades, humiliating the principle, ruining the popular kid's reputation, and trying to stop his mother from dating Andrew Stevens (Massacre at Central High). Munchie probably helps the kid get a date with Jennifer Love Hewitt (in her debut). I'm going to assume after Munchie completed all these tasks, he went on to solve hunger issues and smooth over the Gulf War. Munchie then shows the world how to find peace. At this point he begins feeding on the worship and once his power reaches an apex he plunders the world and recreates it in his image... filled with pizza. Like I said, I haven't seen the end of the film so this is just speculation.

I am a big fan of "early" Jim Wynorski (1987 - 1994). Chopping Mall (1987) is a staple in our house. The Return of Swamp Thing (1989), Sorority House Massacre II (1990), 976-Evil II (1991), and Ghoulies IV (1994) were all fun. When Wynorski went on to his Bare Wench Project (2000) series, he lost his touch.

There is such a vast difference between Munchies (1987) and this so-called sequel. Munchies were a cool Gremlins rip-off, but this singular Munchie is horrid. Munchie is voiced by Dom DeLuise, who seems deliberately unfunny. But if all this seems like fun instead of a chore, you are in luck because there is Munchie Strikes Back (1994).

 

INSIGHT (2021)

dir: Ken Zheng, Livi Zheng

Insight? More like night, night. Amirite? Burn. Drop the mic. I was just bored. It's not necessarily a boring film. There's some action. There's some fighting. There's some psychic fortune telling sub-plot. There's a machine that's never fully explained but can extract thoughts and control people; however, does neither in the film. The movie tries. That has to count for something. Where I speak highly of good Kung Fu in The Last Hurrah For Chivalry, none of those elements are present here. The camera shakes, moves frantically, and it's all punch cut, kick cut, toss cut. Not even Candyman (Tony Todd) or Childs from The Thing (Keith David) can save the show. Hard pass, just queue up The Raid: Redemption (2011) or Chocolate (2008) if you want modern Kung Fu.

KID 90 (2021)

dir: Soleil Moon Frye

"And we're not little children

And we know what we want

And the future is certain

Give us time to work it out"

Kid 90 is an explosion of nostalgia. Soleil Moon Frye, best known as Punky Brewster, carried a camera with her throughout the early to mid-nineties and captured our beloved 90's icons as real teens and not as heartthrobs. I remember saving up from 1994 to the summer of 1996 for my first camera. It was a hefty VHS camcorder, and I took it everywhere. Kid 90 brought a flood of my own memories, as I also recorded my childhood friends at every free moment. I captured the underage drinking. I captured the debauchery as well as the angst. At 14, I documented my small town by asking its teenagers what they thought. The answers were unanimous, they hated the town, authority, and were generally disgusted by their own youth. Kid 90 shows that these experiences weren't singular to your small town group of teens, but also to Hollywood child stars.

Frye's film is candy coated optimism and a slideshow of young celebrities, until it dives below the surface. An embodiment of the teen experience and telling in its honest testimonials of sexual harassment, body image issues, sexual assault, teen suicide, underage drug use, and trying to find yourself when the world has already labeled you. We see the unscripted teen idols: David Arquette, Leonardo DiCaprio, Stephen Dorff, Perry Farrell, Corey Feldman, Sara Gilbert, and Jenny Lewis to name only a fraction that appear. Frye had locked away these memories, literally and figuratively. With this project, she viewed the footage for the first time in nearly twenty years. She shares her Pandora's box with a few willing participants and gauges their reactions. This sparks the tougher conversations in life regarding our own memories.

Don't worry, Stephen Dorff does not cry on camera. I assure you if he did, I'd be sobbing too much to write this. A very selfish thank you to Stephen. It would be a tough world to live in if we had to see you crumble.

 

COMING 2 AMERICA (2021)

 

dir: Craig Brewer

 

Yes. I'm here for this. Craig Brewer of Dolemite Is My Name (2019), Black Snake Moan (2006), and Hustle & Flow (2005) fame does John Landis (Coming To America) proud. There is this feeling that has been lacking in cinema for far too long. It's the John Landis effect. It's a feeling of total celebration. It is the ending of Animal House (1978) or Blues Brothers (1980) or how Oscar (1991) braids all the characters together. From the beginning funeral of King Jaffe Joffer to the final wedding, we are treated to celebration after celebration. Some small like the return of the barbershop guys and some grandiose like Salt-N-Pepa teaming up with En Vogue again. Every frame is pure joy. Even newcomers (to the story) Leslie Jones, Jermaine Fowler, and Tracy Morgan feel as though they've always been there. I'd be remiss to not call out Wesley Snipes who was phenomenal and even dances. I can't give away all the surprises, but there's even a female empowerment storyline woven in. If you enjoyed the first, you should love this. They even call out all the terrible Hollywood movies. Jermaine Fowler says Hollywood only puts out superhero movies, remakes, and sequels to movies people forgot all about. For my money, they missed an opportunity to turn to the camera, break the fourth wall, and stare at us. Yes, it's been done before, but a well placed singular fourth wall break is always welcome. If François Truffaut could do it in 400 Blows (1959), who are we not to follow tradition?

 

 

MAN OF STEEL (2013)

dir: Zack Snyder 

In prepping for Justice League: The Snyder Cut, we've revisited the film that started it all. This is an extremely dark and disturbingly bleak take on Superman, which makes me love it. I don't think we've seen Man of Steel since the theater. I remember there were children laughing at the man in blue. They were so excited, until they stopped laughing. I like to believe that some children learned the true horrors of the world from this film. There should be a PTSD exclaimer before the film starts. I mean watching thousands of people die as two aliens fight and destroy small town America and a large portion of a city is kind of heavy. The film lingers in a few places it doesn't need to. I'm looking at you extended Krypton destruction sequence. But in whole, the experience ages well.

A reluctant hero hiding in the shadows gets called out by a jealous alien general, has to show the world he exists, has to prove to the world he's here to do good, stops a disastrous terraforming machine, and fights an alien to the death. All the while, flashing back to the farm life with his human father teaching him about the good in humanity. While a lot of these elements have been done to death in the Superman world, the interest lies in the Snyder approach to humanity. It is his way to show that heroes must decide whether the good in humanity is worth saving. In Man of Steel, Superman must decide to destroy his heritage if he is to save humankind. Marvel superhero movies don't question the morality of humanity. This isn't an apples to oranges discussion. I'm not going to say I like one more than the other because they both hold enjoyable merits. And they are both destroying Hollywood equally. Thanks DC and Marvel. I'm sorry if you haven't seen Man of Steel, but the moment Superman snaps Zod's neck really f*cking hurts the ten year old in me or even the twenty-year old Smallville fan. But, I'm here for it, there was no other way to stop Zod's quest to destroy all of humankind.

BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (2016)

 

dir: Zack Snyder

 

I set out to enjoy this film more than I originally did in 2016. And to that end, I did. I understood the motivations of the characters the second time around. Also, watching it in tandem with Man of Steel helps too. But with Batman V Superman we really start to see the cracks in the seams that led to the disaster of Justice League. Now, I understand we haven't seen the true third part of Snyder's trilogy so I'm going to stay optimistic. As it stands - prior to the Snyder Cut - Batman V Superman begins to pull the whole construct down. The film feels like a mess. It feels as though there were scenes filmed that helped move the story along, but they were cut out for more fighting. I can even go out on a limb and say I enjoyed the first two acts of this. From the total devastation that occurred at the end of Man of Steel, a long reprieve is warranted. We are given the - at this point redundant - origin story for Bruce Wayne. We are shown him battling Gotham's low-level crooks while a parallel story is being drawn for our new arch-nemesis Lex Luthor. As Alfred says, "Men fall from the sky, the gods hurl thunderbolts, innocents die. That's how it starts, sir. The fever, the rage, the feeling of powerlessness that turns good men... cruel." Both Bruce Wayne and Lex Luthor feel, for the first time, powerless. They both fear that something in their lives may not be in their control, and what we fear we destroy. Lex and Bruce begin a fight to win Kryptonite - the only substance that can harm Superman.

 

I have figured out how to save this film. Never have Batman and Superman fight. Bring out Doomsday right as the two superheroes begin to face off and have their battle last longer. You can even allow Doomsday to wreck some sh*t, go dormant, and resurface as the heroes request the presence of Diana Prince. Because movie, you did Wonder Woman wrong. Sure, we were able to hear her theme music and see a picture that will make sense in her superb stand-alone film, but it seems as the writers decided early on they didn't really need her. They threw her in one or two scenes without much dialogue and nothing to move the story forward. But then the writers wrote themselves into a corner and needed a Deus ex machina and decided, lets throw in Wonder Woman. 

 

Can we also discuss how Jesse Eisenberg publicly stated he had never researched anything related to Lex Luthor and played the character blind? Can we then place that kind of logic on Heath Ledger's The Joker and imagine how that would have turned out. Ledger dove into the psyche of the source material. What did Eisenberg do to prepare? Have a compound anxiety attack and attempt to act his way through it? Lex Luthor is a genius Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor is merely insane. He'd be a great Mad Hatter and maybe that was the issue. Maybe Batman V Superman was going to have our caped heroes face-off against the Mad Hatter and his Doomsday creation. It would have made more sense.

The beginning of the film is everything. Maybe the bar was set too high with the opening that there was no way they could follow through. The film starts by showing us the end of Man of Steel, but from a completely new perspective. We watch the devastation from Bruce Wayne / a pedestrian's point of view. We see aliens fighting and the world around us crumbing. Building's topple over and there is smoke and there is rubble and there are people screaming for their lives. Synder brilliantly opens his film making us empathize with those who were at or near the end of the world and asking if it was worth it. As an audience we know it's worth it because the world was about to be destroyed, but to them the world was destroyed. There was no way the rest of the film could compete with that philosophy, especially when it billed itself as a who-will-win match between two of our greatest comic book heroes.

******

Best viewing of the week. While it was a nice surprise to enjoy Man of Steel and I know that I should pick Last Hurrah for Chivalry or Picnic At Hanging Rock, I'm going to say my favorite viewing this week was: 

HIGH: COMING 2 AMERICA

Worst viewing of the week. This week it's easy.

LOW: MUNCHIE

TV CORNER: