#I also wrote a review of it on my new letterboxd if anyone wants to stalk or follow me on there (ianandhismovies) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

wellntruly · 2 years

Text

I rank all the movies I've watched from 2021 (40)

It’s that time again!! i.e. sneaking in just before Hollywood’s Biggest Night 🎩 (lol)

Title links go to my original spoiler-free Letterboxd reviews, followed by another link if I also wrote a longer piece (I always note if there will be spoilers in those, if there is no note you’re good!)

No building up this time we’re just starting at the top:

1. The Souvenir: Part II

When I walked out of the theater after seeing this I felt so fucking alive. [Full review]

2. The Power of the Dog

What I want to holler here I can’t holler for spoilers. Love that in a movie!!! Anyway the phrase that has gotten others to watch it: queer western gothic. [Full review]

3. The Green Knight

Sexiest movie of the year a meditation on death, feels good feels right. Revisionist medievalism re-edited over a pandemic to be longer and mistier. Daniel Hart’s score my most-listened-to album of 2021. The cloak is gold. Catch me on a certain day and this might be my #1. [Full review]

4. Drive My Car (ドライブ・マイ・カー)

Tender! [Full review]

5. Bo Burnham: Inside

Film of the year actually though [Full review]

6. Bergman Island

Interestingly given my love for it, I haven’t really recommended this yet to anyone. Watching Mia Wasikowska dance by herself is something that can actually be so personal..?

7. Pig

We’ll get to it if I post my nominations but Alex Wolff best supporting actor. [Full review]

8. Spencer

Sad girl Christmas! We love a daymare. Crafts exquisite, Kristen also exquisite. Weirder even than I hoped. [Full review]

9. The Matrix Resurrections

Haha go Lana, GO Lana! Wild this movie exists. Matrix Winter was such a time. [Full review]

10. Annette

The thing is this is boldest cinematic imagining I saw all year. I saw nothing else like this. Does all of it work? No! Is anyone else doing half of this? Noooooooo. And for good reason! But thank god Leos Carax will! Simon Helberg also best supporting actor. Why was Marion Cotillard eating so many apples… Fuck! Annette! Remember when Baby Annette!!?!

11. Azor

The Martin Eden prize for stylish, little-seen international feature that I keep bugging people about. “Did you guys see Azor though?” “What?”

12. Dune

If you go to my Letterboxd post you’ll see I only gave this movie 3.5 stars, but I already know it’s raising to 4 when I rewatch it, just on the power of vibes. Now that’s desert power. (God it’s so silly though!) (We can admit that a little bit right?) (Denis??) (Denis can’t hear me over his Rice Krispies sand)

13. Passing

First Harold of a very Harold year, babyyyy! Truly though I read the novella after and this was such an assured adaptation.

14. The French Dispatch

Bananas to say this but people are really undervaluing Wes Anderson, one of our greatest directors. Do you know that only one of his films has ever even been nominated for any crafts categories at the Oscars? Meanwhile no one is doing the work quite like him. And the first and third acts and especially interstitial of this are remarkable.

15. Flee (Flugt)

Sometimes the year's wrenching Afghan refugee story also includes a dance sequence to a-ha's 'Take On Me' five minutes in. Something something humanity, basically.

16. The Tragedy of Macbeth

The stars are lights on a velvet sky!! Honestly the fact that I hold this so high (such as higher than the next one!) is really a testament to how far design elements will get you with me.

17. The Worst Person In the World (Verdens verste menneske)

I did like it but! is it weird she doesn’t have a single female friend? Or…any friend? Renate and Anders very good though. Oslo looks like, restful.

18. A Hero (قهرمان)

I saw a picture of this actor later and I didn’t believe it. Performance!

19. Shiva Baby

I have never wanted to watch someone eat a bagel more. I lived vicariously through every bite of that bagel. Why am I so bagel deprived, shit. Is it because I left New York. Anyway Uncut Gems found in the back of the van under all of Joel’s boxes.

20. Parallel Mothers (Madres paralelas)

I just need to impress on you that in this film Penélope Cruz makes a tortilla española. Wow my top twenty is ending very hungry. (And wlw) (Harold look alive!)

And now the also-rans!

Musicals Corner

West Side Story Cyrano Tick, Tick…BOOM!

I gave all three of these 3.5 stars and they all landed back-to-back and that was not intentional but is: kinda funny. Interestingly I don’t think any of these three directors would begrudge me this. They wouldn’t, would they? They’d all be like aw thanks for the good company, I liked what those guys were doing too.

More 3.5's

The Lost Daughter Zola No Time To Die

This is a weird combo and yet, something about it kind of flows. I enjoy a 3.5! 3.5 is on the whole positive.

Some kinda complicated 3's that I nonetheless do keep thinking about at odd moments

The Hand of God (È stata la mano di Dio) Benedetta House of Gucci The Last Duel

Sometimes 3 means: ambivalent. Wow I don’t know! I think all of these are interesting though, I know that. Also those two Ridley Scotts could really go in either order, have swapped several times just while I typed this up.

3's that were perfectly fine and that’s it

CODA I’m Your Man (Ich bin dein Mensch) In the Heights

Sometimes that’s it!

The Belfast Award for Belfast (2.5)

Belfast

Weirdly, I’m very glad I watched it.

And lastly: I’m sorry ❤️

Nightmare Alley F9

There would certainly be others in this category with them, but I simply chose not to, because I'm not sure that sorry would get the heart.

There were also plenty others I just haven’t got around to yet, nothing personal! I will catch you later probably, C’mon C’mon and The Humans and Wheel of Fortune & Fantasy and idk, Old?? Actually I do still kinda wanna watch Old…why do I wanna watch Old..! Stop me from watching Old.

Also, the rest of the docs I watched:

Summer of Soul Procession Listening to Kenny G The Truffle Hunters

All five documentaries I saw were doing such different things and I like that about the medium very much. Animated memoir, historical concert film, experimental/drama therapy, the only way to do a talking-heads style doc, and a sort of natural-world mosaic with kinda no center but beauuutiful cinematography. A very good year for non-fiction! Actually technically The Truffle Hunters might have been a 2020, but I couldn’t figure it out? I mean is Cyrano even a 2021 and not actually a 2022? Emotionally?? WHAT YEAR EVEN IS IT.

It is 2022, definitely, (checks), and I am finally calling it on the films of 2021. Happy Oscars week.

#Wellntruly's Watch Log #The Movies

39 notes · View notes

letterboxd · 4 years

Photo

Life in Film: Kris Rey.

As her new comedy I Used to Go Here opens, Chicago-based writer and director Kris Rey talks to Letterboxd editor-in-chief Gemma Gracewood about turning 40, divorce, female friendships, why nobody but Jemaine Clement could pull off a scene making tea, and what we can all learn from Generation Z.

If Kris Rey’s new comedy I Used to Go Here were a typical Hollywood rom-com, it would finish just before Rey’s film starts: with Kate Conklin (Gillian Jacobs) as a newly published author, engaged to be married to a handsome guy. Instead, we meet Kate in a Bushwick apartment she can no longer afford, as her publishing company breaks the news that her debut novel (Seasons Passed; terrible cover art, purple prose) is a failure and the publicity tour is off. That’s on top of the insult that her fiancé has recently ended their engagement.

Kate is given a faint ray of optimism when her creative writing professor (Jemaine Clement) invites her back to the liberal arts college she graduated from a decade earlier, to give a talk to his Gen Z students. Leaving Brooklyn and her pregnant bestie behind, Kate dives into the nostalgia of her old Illinois stomping ground, and I Used to Go Here turns into a low-key, pot-fuelled, intergenerational romp through ideas of success, friendship, creativity, authenticity and idolization.

The film’s fans on Letterboxd include Matt Neglia, who writes: “Gillian Jacobs brings charismatic charm and restraint to her role as a writer longing for a time when we were filled with endless potential without the fear of failure.” Matt DeTurck identifies with this theme: “Relatable for anyone wrestling with fitting the pieces of their life together in ways that feel truthful.”

On the contemporary representation of university life, Alex Billington remarks that “it’s got all the college movie tropes… but it repackages all of these in a smart adult-looking-back indie film package”. Max notes that “the college kids are an invaluable addition and feel like people rather than college or Gen Z stereotypes”.

Kate (Gillian Jacobs) and David (Jemaine Clement) in a scene from ‘I Used to Go Here’.

Your film starts just after the point at which a mainstream comedy about a single white woman in her thirties would end: with Kate’s book being published to no acclaim, her engagement being broken off, everybody else pregnant except her. It runs in opposition to the happy endings Hollywood has made us expect. Kris Rey: Oh god, [that’s] so astute. No-one has said that before and I have never thought of it before, but that’s so true! I think what’s so interesting about the whole journey that she goes on, and all of our own personal journeys, is that you’re used to, like, at the end of the movie, they get married! She gets her book published! And then everything is perfect! And then you realize: ‘Oh. Oh god, okay. How do I move on from this?’ So, you’re right, that is what’s so different about this.

The other thing—and I’m sure this can be said about most films this year—is how the set-up feels weirdly right for these times, which is to say: the widespread derailment of plans that the pandemic has wrought. It’s like we’re in a strange global coming-of-age. Several Letterboxd reviews observe how, for women in their late twenties to early thirties, there’s a second coming-of-age where everything suddenly feels extremely nostalgic. The film dives into that longing feeling by literally returning Kate to her old college. It’s funny, you know, a lot of people have pointed out how this doesn’t quite fit into a category. It’s not a rom-com, it’s not a true coming-of-age film in a sense of what we know that to be. I think that part of it is exactly what you’ve just pointed out, which is that it’s about a unique period of time for women, where you do reach this precipice. Mostly, it comes out of this big ever-pressing question which is “Am I going to have a family or not?”. Not every woman, but most women, have that question in their head until they either have a baby or they reach the age where they can’t have a baby anymore. “Am I going to have this? Am I going to follow this path of domesticity? Am I going to find a relationship that works long enough to have a family with them? Am I going to have to make sacrifices in my career to make room to have a family? Am I going to find them all at once?” Men just don’t have that point, to no fault of their own, but the fault of the patriarchy in general, which is that it has to be a conscious decision for women in a way that everything revolves around that, as we go about our lives at that age.

And you’ve explored that idea in more than just this film. I loved the awkward-yet-sincere moment at the baby shower, when the friends make her hold her book alongside their third-trimester bumps for a group photo. A book is a baby, and its publication should also be celebrated! Scenes like that emphasize how well Gillian Jacobs embraced the role of Kate. What did she bring to it that wasn’t on the page? There’s such a special thing that happens when you cast anyone for anything. It certainly happened with Gillian, but also with everyone. Definitely Jemaine was a big one, which is that I don’t typically write for specific actors. I write a character, I write the dialog, and then when I cast them I think ‘oh, Jemaine Clement is going to be in this role’, so then I go back through and read the whole thing in his voice and think ‘maybe he’d say it like this instead’ and maybe after [a scene we don’t wish to spoil], he would make tea for everyone. Very few, if any, American actors would be able to pull that moment off. That is kind of what I’m looking for: who are they? Are they able to feel like real people? Because so often they feel performative.

Like versions of a person. Right. Like they’re acting like a person! Gillian is very authentic. If you were to talk to her, she would just seem like her real self, and that was what was so appealing about her for me. Gillian just really brought herself, and I learned about her as a person.

As well as great comics like Kate Micucci and Jorma Taccone, there’s a lovely assortment of inclusive young characters who live in Kate’s old student house. Where did you find them? I just flushed them out and gathered them and held them close! There’s a couple of them that I didn’t know but I had seen in other stuff. Josh Wiggins, who plays Hugo, I’d seen him act in a movie called Hellion. Forrest Goodluck I saw in The Miseducation of Cameron Post. He’s incredible in that and I knew I wanted him to play Animal. Hannah Marks was someone that was sent to me, and we talked on the phone and I just knew she would be perfect. She’s such a brilliant go-getter and filmmaker and so ambitious in her own life. Khloe Janel, who plays Emma, auditioned for me here in Chicago and she’s so good. I adore her. I was taking a walk yesterday through the neighborhood and I saw her name on a little sign—she was making these poetry zines! I bought one.

Hugo (Josh Wiggins), Animal (Forrest Goodluck) and Tall Brandon (Brandon Daley) in ‘I Used to Go Here’.

The person we need to know about is whoever the guy is who plays Tall Brandon! Brandon Daley, who plays tall Brandon, is a person that I just knew. He is on the periphery of my social circle and he had come to a few parties at my house. His buddies called him ‘Tall Brandon’, in this very demeaning way! They were of course all good friends. I thought he was such a funny character that I wrote the character based on him. But I didn’t know him. Then he heard that I had written a part called Tall Brandon and he asked if he could play the part. I was like, “I don’t think so, Brandon!”

Was he an actor? Kind of. He’s a filmmaker but he’s much younger than me and he hadn’t done anything besides his own work. But I made him audition for the role based on him! [Laughs] I don’t know, I was just like, it’s a huge role, you know? The last thing you want is someone who can’t act like themselves, which everyone struggles to do. Anyway, he was so good in the audition, so funny, and he just nailed it. He steals the whole movie! He’s just so good.

I Used to Go Here is a long way from problematic college fare like Revenge of the Nerds or the angst of St Elmo’s Fire. It feels thoroughly 21st-century, especially in how the Gen Z housemates take an inclusive, ‘sure, why not’ approach to having Kate tag along with them. What inspired the way you wrote the intergenerational aspects of the film? There weren’t necessarily college films that I was using for inspiration. I wanted the place to feel the same that she left, but I wanted the people to feel different. This is what I’m finding in my life. I’m gonna turn 40 this year, and when I interact with people in their twenties, I’m blown away by the way that they view the world and the way that they view themselves and each other. I’m so impressed by it. And I am on board with a lot of these cultural changes that we’re seeing happen before our eyes, like, the idea of gender identity has changed so much, and so quickly. I’ve never seen anything change like that in my life. The idea of consent. When I first heard it I was like, “What? You have to ask if you wanna touch someone or kiss someone? It seems so lame!” Now, I can’t believe that we ever did that! I’m learning so much. They seem so clear-headed about it all. I just think that we have a lot to learn from that generation.

The movie’s not about that, necessarily, but it’s infused into it and I wanted that to influence Kate, in her life. Some of it is specific to this generation, but some of it is also just specific to being in your twenties. The character April, the way that she thinks about the [publishing] industry and her art, and the way that Kate, who is jaded, is like, “Okay, whatever, you’re naïve, make your little magazine, but you’ll have to follow the rules.” We’ve all been faced with that before.

Kris Rey with her son Jude Swanberg on the set of ‘I Used to Go Here’. / Photo by Blair Todd

So it’s a watershed year for you, turning 40. What would you define success and happiness as now, compared to when you were in your twenties and the ideas you had about the industry then? Oh, god. Okay so I’ve also had a lot of personal growth because I got divorced this last year, which was crazy. I’ve got two kids, a four year old and a nine year old. So I’ve been through so much; it’s been such a huge change for me. I have learned a lot, but one of the things that I have learned so much is that the relationships that matter the most in my life are my female friendships. I’ve always known that, but I’ve never seen it so much as I have in the last two years, both personally throughout my divorce, and professionally through making a film without a romantic partner to lean on. Of course I have male friends that are wonderful and supportive, but my female friends, those relationships are where I’m realizing I wanna put my effort into more than any other part of my life.

Okay, it’s time for a few questions about movies that are important to you. Thinking back, what is the film that made you want to be a filmmaker? Boogie Nights was the first film that I watched when I was in high school that I thought ‘oh, this is a job, and I’m seeing someone make stylistic choices that are interesting and unique’. You can see the behind the scenes in that movie a little bit. I remember watching it and thinking ‘that would be a cool job’. I also really loved the movie Bottle Rocket in high school. I began my filmmaking career thinking that I wanted to make documentaries, and so there’s also a lot of docs that I loved. But those were the early films that made me realize that it was even a job. Unfortunately not any female filmmakers, because I think that was just so rare [then].

What is your all-time comfort favorite film? Sleepless in Seattle, no question.

There’s your female filmmaker! Yes, but with a movie like Sleepless in Seattle, it’s such a mainstream movie that I never thought of it as ‘a job’. It wasn’t until I was in high school that I saw more independent and auteurish works. But Nora Ephron is a genius. That movie is perfect in my opinion.

What’s a film that, as a teenager, felt like a mirror into your soul? That movie with Chris O’Donnell, an Irish film, Circle of Friends. With Minnie Driver! Who is also in Good Will Hunting, another film I saw in high school. I haven’t seen Circle of Friends since it came out, but it felt very real to me, that movie. I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned that movie to anyone!

Gwyneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes in ‘Shakespeare in Love’ (1998).

What is the sexiest film you’ve ever seen? Shakespeare in Love! [Laughs.] There’s two movies. One was Legends of the Fall. It was literally the sexiest movie I’d ever seen up till that point. I was very young when it came out and there was this lovemaking scene by candlelight and I was like, ‘oh, that’s what sex is!’. And then Shakespeare in Love. That scene where he’s unwrapping her? So hot.

Who is another director you’d die for? I’m such a huge fan of Nicole Holofcener. I love her films so much. I have never met her. I do know some people that know her and I am honestly so scared to meet her because I like her work so much. She’s probably my favorite filmmaker. I just vibe with everything she makes. I love the tone. I just love all of her movies.

What’s a film that we should watch after we watch yours? You should watch She Dies Tomorrow. It’s so good, and Amy Seimetz is my very, very close and dear friend. We started making movies at the same time. Our movies were supposed to premiere at SXSW on the same day, and now they are being released on the same day, and we’re just in love with each other. Amy and I are— the movies are so wildly different from each other, but her movie is so good. It is really funny, it’s really weird and it’s really appropriate for the times right now.

I feel like some reviews are missing the comedy in it. I laughed so much throughout that film. I agree: people don’t get it! Can I shout out another movie that I watched recently? Crossing Delancey. I had never seen it before and my sister-in-law texted me and she was like, “you should watch this film like right now—this seems like something you would love”. I couldn’t believe how good it was. It’s so great. It feels like it could be shot right now in Brooklyn. All the cool kids in Brooklyn are dressing exactly the same way that all the cool kids in Brooklyn dressed in 1988, or whenever it came out. She’s having a dialog with a friend and the friend is like openly breastfeeding. And the way that they’re talking about romance and all this stuff is so on point. That movie’s great.

And another female director! Joan Micklin Silver. Yeah!

Related content

Dana Danger’s chronological list of films directed by women

Appropriate Behavior: the Letterboxd Showdown of indie, slacker and mumblecore films

Quarter Life Crisis: a list by Mary, and another by Michelle

Follow Gemma on Letterboxd

‘I Used to Go Here’ is now in select theaters and on demand. All press images are courtesy of Gravitas Ventures.

#kris rey #i used to go here #college film #college comedy #comedy #jemaine clement #gillian jacobs #female director #directed by women #52 films by women #kate micucci #jorma taccone #letterboxd

3 notes · View notes

donnerpartyofone · 5 years

Text

i just got a whole bunch of new followers on letterboxd, and checking out who they all are really reminded me of why i don’t follow too many people on letterboxd. bad amateur writing is hard to enjoy even ironically, but there’s something about bad film writing that’s really harmful. i have hate-read so many of this one guy’s reviews that i feel embarrassed about it now. he describes himself as an “arthouse manager”, which i assume means he runs a theater, but it bothers me because nobody says “let’s go out to the arthouse tonight” without the word “theater” in there, it’s just unnatural and pretentious. so that’s red flag #1 right in his description, which is followed by red flag #2 about how he hates modern media, as if being a luddite or nostalgia freak automatically means you’re a sensitive genius. it’s probably worth mentioning a sub-red flag, which is that he also says he’s 27 years old, which has to mean that he either wants to be congratulated for being precocious somehow, or he thinks he’s going to get laid off this movie website where you can’t even post pictures of yourself, or both, i mean who fucking cares how old you are anyway, for what reason? then the first review is of DAYS OF BEING WILD, in which he describes Wong Kar-Wai as “seeking to understand what draws women to shitty, emotionally unavailable men”; i mean imagine being so full of shit that you project your own sullen incel-y “UGH WHY DO GIRLS ONLY LIKE BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH” garbage onto whatever revered works of art show up on your tv screen? this guy goes on to reveal himself in almost a strip tease fashion across many of his reviews, breaking up his pompous analyses with macho mindbenders like “i have often said that being horny is the point of life” and biographical information like about his manipulative alcoholic father. i’m not trying to say that everybody with a delinquent or dysfunctional parent is destined to have idiotic and serial killerish attitudes about intimacy, because that would condemn pretty much all of us. but, i am sadly familiar with solipsistic assholes who brandish their alleged intellectual superiority in one fist while beating the dust out of their childhood traumas with the other, and just seeing his smug letterboxd reviews tells me everything i need to know about him. hopefully he just followed me in a spammy way to get attention and will never interact, or maybe i’ll say something he finds politically disagreeable and he’ll go away.

honestly finding anybody worth following on letterboxd is kind of hard. it can be nice to read stuff by people who are just having fun and shooting straight about what they’re watching, but the site is filled with wannabe J Hobermans and Lester Bangses who are just out to prove that they own a thesaurus. they’re practically all dudes, you can smell the old spice and maker’s mark wafting out of your laptop fan when you read some of this chest-pounding nonsense. not all of them have such toxic things to say as the aforementioned douchebag, but there’s a real preponderance of users who seem to think they’re reinventing the language. the sad thing is when they really like MY writing. there’s this guy i follow who i think used to write fairly clearly, but now everything he posts looks like a burroughs cut-up with really avant garde ideas about punctuation and adjectives, and unfortunately, i think it’s on purpose. i’d unfollow him, but i feel like i can’t, because he is as nice as literally anyone has ever been about my writing. he goes so far as to give me a hard time about why i’m not a professional film critic, he’s like a ~fan~...and then i gotta ask myself, how much is my writing like HIS writing? this is where the difficulties of letterboxd start to feel worth while, in a masochistic kind of way. like, how often do i write in the same wanky bombastic fashion as these shitty little internet valedictorians who i hate so much? probably a lot! i don’t like feeling that way but i have to admit that i’m grateful for the opportunity to check myself, and possibly improve.

however good or bad i am, letterboxd is still a better place to write than tumblr. i mean tumblr is less than optimal for long form writing anyway, but it’s also a question of who the majority population is here. the other day i got a comment on a pretty old post i wrote about ANNIHILATION, a movie i found kind of smarmy and shallow. the commenter said that my points about the movie were good, BUT they would all be negated by the content of the novels on which the movie is based, and they wanted to know why i deliberately omitted this material from my analysis, as if this were a conspiracy to be unraveled. they actually asked me what the point of my post was, like what was my goal in writing only what i wrote and leaving all kinds of things out. basically. this person COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THE IDEA OF A MOVIE REVIEW. i answered them, because they had tried hard to be polite, that my movie review blog is just for movie reviews, in which i talk about what i think about movies i watch. i’m not pursuing everything related to certain intellectual properties, nor am i invested in the logic and content of Extended Universes of whatever individual movies i’m watching. i’m not mad at this person, who was asking an honest question, but i was completely dumbfounded by the question itself. i mean imagine being SO INVESTED in fandom as like a type of lifestyle that you don’t know what a movie review is anymore? like every piece of media is regarded as some sort of municipality, that belongs to a state, and is governed by certain people, and its characters are like Real People who are available for friendship, dating and more. no piece of media is just entertainment, or even an artistic statement anymore. for this person, watching a movie is something like studying civic infrastructure, except with more DIY alterations and more fetishizing of gay men. i keep trying to imagine reading three paragraphs about some middling hollywood movie that amounts to something like “i did not enjoy watching this film,” and just having no personal frame of reference AT ALL for what it means when somebody writes that down. like just not knowing what a movie review is at all, and asking the author to explain the meaning of the bizarre behavior of saying you thought some movie sucked.

why DOES anybody write about movies though? if i don’t find it normal or desirable to watch everything with an exclusive filter for who do you want to fuck and who do you want to see fucking each other, then what else am i getting at? surely i don’t see myself as a potential roger ebert or leonard maltin, especially considering the extremely limited number of celebrity film critics in the history of mankind. i’m also not Pro- the idea of sorting all movies according to some rigid standards of technical quality and deservingness, like anybody needs me to grade them after they’ve performed the nearly impossible-seeming task of even making one single movie to begin with. sometimes i stupidly start complaining about stupid responses to my writing that i get once in a while from the internet, and my shrink asks me, “what are you up to when you post this writing?” she always says i’m “up to something” when i seem to be following but willfully ignoring my subconscious drives, which i think is pretty funny. but i don’t think i’m pursuing feelings of superiority, over movies or other writers. i think i’m just trying to figure out what movies are trying to say about human existence--and they all are trying to say something, are motivated by some angst, even the really insulting ones that only offer up wish fulfillment pablum. i’m constantly trying and failing to figure out my own existence, and i must sense that attempting to decipher movies is one way of getting closer to decoding my own experiences.

and on that note, now i have to complain about the fact that Lyft’s driver rating system includes “fun conversation” as one of the four factors in giving someone five stars. i rarely want a stranger to try to force me to talk to them, especially at 4am when i’m headed to the airport under a miserable pile of luggage. even so, i recently got into a car in such a state, with a guy who was clearly going for that five star rating, babbling loudly and convulsively at me all the way to my terminal. it would be one thing if he were just trying to be nice, but he was giving me shit about everything from my pickup location to what i had done in his fair city for a week and a half. i did not immediately volunteer how many movies i had seen at the festival i attended, because i probably intuited that when he did make me tell him, he would inform me that he doesn’t need to watch movies, because “I WATCH *LIFE*, MAN!!!” the irony was that this guy clearly didn’t watch life at all; he didn’t even have the ability to discern that i didn’t want to talk, or that i didn’t want him to insult my favorite leisure activity, and that probably NOBODY wants to listen to him talk about his shitty generic blues rock band for half an hour before 5am. so that’s the one thing i can say for even the most obnoxious reviewer on letterboxd--that probably they are TRYING to hone the art of observation, a dying skill. probably they are TRYING to train themselves to be an active audience that engages thoughtfully with the movie instead of just hucking rotten tomatoes at the screen OR passively allowing it to wash over them. even if i often hate the results, at least some of these guys seem be making an effort.

12 notes · View notes

crowdvscritic · 4 years

Text

round up // JANUARY 20

I laughed! I cried! January was an emotional month in the world of pop culture. These were my favorites in a month of travel and hunkering inside away from the cold.

January Crowd-Pleasers

John Mulaney and the Sack Lunch Bunch (2019)

The cast addresses whether or not this is an ironic kids’ special at the top, but I still don’t feel confident labeling it. I laughed start to finish because of songs and sketches about algebra, plain pasta, and Jake Gyllenhaal’s incompetence teaching music. Bonus: Singing this soundtrack at the top of your lungs is a great stress-reliever.

Fine Line by Harry Styles (2019)

He dresses like Prince and dances like Mick Jagger. “She” feels like a late-era Beatles track, and “Canyon Moon” could have been on a Simon and Garfunkel record. It’s insanely re-listenable and more emotionally and artistically mature than his original solo album.

A Trip to Stars Hollow

My second Warner Bros. Studio Tour was even more magical than my first thanks to the recreation of the Gilmore Girls set. The best part? I went with one of my best friends, my Gilmore Girls podcast co-host, Kyla. Find out why it was so magical on our podcast.

youtube

A Quiet Place: Part II Trailer (2020)

Is this movie an unnecessary sequel? Probably. Am I going see it? Totally.

Beach Too Sandy, Water Too Wet Podcast (2018 - )

I haven’t laughed this hard because of a podcast in awhile. (Maybe since Gilmore Guys?) A brother-sister team reads some of the pettiest online reviews in a most dramatic fashion, and it’s just as genius an idea as it sounds.

Newsies (1992)

The journalism student in me felt a kinship to this kid-friendly introduction to the power of the written word accompanied by Kenny Ortega dance moves. Further confirmation that if I’d been older in the ‘90s, Bill Pullman would have been the dreamboat covering the posters on my bedroom wall.

youtube

Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist (2020 - )

Not a perfect pilot, but it did succeed in making my cry. You know I love musicals and Lauren Graham, so you know I’ll be back for the second episode.

SNL with Adam Driver

My favorite actor of the moment (and I suspect for many moments to come) hosted one of the best episodes of the season. Not just anyone can hold an audience captive like he does, and he killed it in his monologue. (See Styles for another rare example). Don’t miss the highlights from this episode, including a very catchy Oscars song from Melissa Villaseñor:

“Chill Monologue”

“Undercover Boss: Where Are They Now”

“Sleepover”

“Weekend Update: Melissa Villaseñor on Oscar Snubs”

January Critic Picks

Late Season Awards Contenders

Okay, some of these were late for me. This month I watched The Two Popes, The Farewell, The Last Black Man in San Francisco, 1917, and Marriage Story, and—spoiler alert!—they all made my Best of 2019 list. See where these 5 and 15 more rank in my top 20.

Little Women (1933, 1949, 1994)

Wait, wasn’t this movie on my list last month? The 2019 version sure was, but since then, I’ve watched the 1933 and 1949 versions for the first time and refreshed myself on the 1994 classic. They confirmed Greta Gerwig’s new adaptation is my favorite, but there’s not a bad one in the bunch. (Katharine Hepburn as Jo! Elizabeth Taylor as Amy!) Kudos to Turner Classic Movies for interviewing Gerwig to introduce the ’33 and ’49 versions when they aired.

Stage Door (1937)

Katharine Hepburn? Ginger Rogers? Together? That’s all I needed to hit play on this one. They lead a cast of talented ladies in a funny (and at times, tragic) take on the classic saga of trying to make it as a star. A Best Picture nominee!

To Be or Not to Be (1942)

If you liked Jojo Rabbit or Inglourious Basterds, you’ll want to check out this contemporary World War II Nazi comedy they both borrow from a lot. The jokes still hold up today.

The Good Place Finale

A lot of things on this list made me cry, but this was ugliest cry of them all. The Good Place is was one of the greatest modern TV comedies (I’m having trouble accepting the past tense), but the last episode went in deep on the philosophy that set it apart from most shows on television and sent me more than once to prayer.

Also in January...

Oh, did you catch I wrote my Best of 2019 piece? It’s one of my most favorite (and most agonizing) pieces to write every year, so I’m going to just drop the link again right here.

In addition to our magical trip to Stars Hollow, Kyla and I watched birth episodes from the classic sitcoms I Love Lucy and The Dick Van Dyke Show.

The writers at ZekeFilm caught up on classics from the 2010s we never got around to. Me? I finally watched 12 Years a Slave. We’ve also been catching up on Oscar-nominated shorts, and I covered the heartwarming Hair Love.

Now that I’m all caught up on Best Picture nominees (even if not all of them made my Best of 2019 list), my Letterboxd is getting refueled with Turner Classic Movies picks again. (Yay!)

Photo credits: Harry Styles; Beach Too Sandy, Water Too Wet; SNL. Stars Hollow my own. All others IMDb.com.

1 note · View note

samdukewieland · 4 years

Text

Stuck Inside Media Diary Week 2

New week. New movies I had never seen before. Only one was on the DVR so now it’s just like a glorified streaming guide and for that I apologize. There were three movies this week that I had seen before, but I’ve decided, because rules are important, that I won’t re-watch a movie until I watch a new one. Does this matter? No. But it has made me realize that I might be exposing my ass in the upcoming weeks, because we all lie about saying we’ve seen some movies when we actually haven’t. Not the case for this week, but it’s impending.

Sunday, March 29

Warrior, O’Conner 2011 [as of now this is available on Amazon Prime]

As a person who doesn’t really care about MMA or UFC or boxing or bum fights or bare knuckle brawls I went in under the impression that there’d probably be some kind of barrier in my way of enjoying it, despite knowing its esteemed reputation for being man-weep canon. Any movie that opens and closes with a song by The National is fairly transparent about the type of movie its going to be, despite having an extremely yolked Tom Hardy as one of the main characters. My first cry came at a very unexpected moment, especially because Frank Grillo had a significant role in making that happen (though I will say, I had no idea Frank Grillo was in this movie and about midway through I thought “man, that guy kinda looks like Grillo, but he’s kinda small and has a fashion mullet”). However, I’m a cryer, so I don’t want to set the expectation of you will cry at this you piece of shit! but you might and it’ll come out of a good place, because this movie doesn’t trick you into crying by manipulating you into it (okay, it does at one point, but it involves Moby Dick, so again, it’s kinda unexpected). It opens with “Start A War” and ends with “About Today,” a top 5 sad boy song by The National and I’ll be damned if I didn’t listen to it once a day all last week.

Better Call Saul

“Sunk Costs”, “Sabrosito”, “Chicanery”, “Off Brand”, “Expanses”

John Getz hive, assemble.

Monday, March 30

Working Girl, Nichols 1988 [as of now this is available on HBO]

Sometime in college, I think in a detective fiction class I took, we talked about knowing a reference to something before knowing what it’s either paying homage to or directly referencing. For example: the first time I read The Long Halloween (which is a Batman comic by Jeph Loeb) I had no idea that basically everything involving Falcone is just ripped from The Godfather, because I had never seen The Godfather at that time in my life; literally the first page of the book is “I believe in Gotham City.” Or in Django Unchained when they go to Mississippi and the title card moves across the screen just like it does in Gone With The Wind (Tarantino movies are generally just long homages and references to other things, so if you need another example, just look to really anything he’s ever worked on). There’s probably a German word for this feeling of recognition and I just don’t have the energy to look to see what it would be, but I felt it while watching Working Girl in two regards.

The first was that I didn’t realize that School Of Rock is essentially just Working Girl and when you have a realization like this, you feel kinda dumb, because you just assume everyone figured this out before you did. The second was that Joe Swanberg has tried to model his movies after Mike Nichols ones like his life depended on it and he just can’t or rather hasn’t. Also I’m not a person who was alive in the 80s and I’m sure there’s some modern day equivalent (potentially her daughter) who I defend out of some weird sense of contrarian obligation, but what’s uh, what’s going on with Melanie Griffith and her as actor?

Better Call Saul

“Slip”, “Fall”, “Lantern” [Season 3 finale]

BCS season 3 really stepped up to the heights of Breaking Bad and I think I might like it just a little bit better than it? I haven’t watched Breaking Bad in long time, I find it pretty difficult to re-watch (it’s very fire works factory for me) so I’m sure there are some BB highs that I just don’t remember fully, but that BCS can juggle being three different shows all at the same time and do it excellently really has me taken aback. It’s like watching the Coen Brothers jump from genre to genre and not be worried about the end result.

Tuesday, March 31

Say Anything..., Crowe 1989 [as of now this is available on Hulu]

I’m unabashedly in the can for Cameron Crowe, which is a semi-embarrassing thing to admit, but whatever. I saw Aloha in theatres and watched We Bought A Zoo when it was on FX once (in real time too, so that means with commercials-this was also the only time I’ve seen We Bought A Zoo, but I think I’d do it again); you can’t hurt me. I think I kept my distance from Say Anything... for so long, because it was one of those things that I’d be annoyed at because it’d resonate with me too much, because feeling that is kinda hacky and embarrassing, but if there’s one thing that Cameron Crowe movies put an emphasis on of importance on, it’s being sincere. And I sincerely loved it (hot, HOT take). Thanks to Russillo for recommending it on Simmons’ podcast last week.

Better Call Saul

“Smoke” [Season 4 premiere]

Wednesday, April 1

The Graduate, Nichols 1967 [as of now this is available on Amazon Prime]

Sucks that this movie has been used by a certain type of dude who use it as a blueprint for their life and how they view relationships. Other than that, good job everyone. [I definitely thought it would be clever to watch this after watching Say Anything... because I just assumed Ben Braddock walked so Lloyd Dobbler could run-I was kinda right, whatever]

Hot Rod, Schaffer 2007

While April Fools Day means nothing to me I do try to watch a comedy on the day, because...eh, why not. Hot Rod is maybe a perfect comedy and I think I could spend hours talking about it. I don’t know how there hasn’t been some kind of programming that’s been done around The Lonely Island and their catalog, because it seems very obvious.

Hot Rod with Digital Shorts played before and after and then Wayne’s World

MacGruber and you play MacGruber shorts before and after and then whatever grotesque 80′s action movie you’d want, maybe Commando

Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping with Lonely Island music videos before and after and then This Is Spinal Tap

The Unauthorized Bash Brothers Experience sing-a-long followed by The Lonely Island pilot and either a collection or the entirety of I Think You Should Leave

maybe this is all a lead-up to Palm Springs, a movie I have’t seen and know very little about other than they produced it and Samberg is in it

Thursday, April 2

The In-Laws, Hiller 1979

I wrote it as my letterboxd. “review” , but this thing’s 1979 funny until they go to South America and then it is actually funny. Falk is just gangbusters.

Better Call Saul

“Breathe”, “Something Beautiful”

Friday, April 3

You Can Count On Me, Lonergan 2000 [as of now this is available on Amazon Prime]

I say this as a very big fan of his, but! Timothée Chalamet, consider yerself on notice for borrowing heavily from the Mark Ruffalo school of acting. Also, I get it now with Laura Linney, who I’ve liked before, but thought she might kind of be overrated by some people. Also, Matthew Broderick made this after Election (and also Inspector Gadget), so quite the infidelity streak for Brody, probably not a double feature.

Better Call Saul

“Talk”, “Quite A Ride”, “Piñata”

Saturday, April 4

De Palma, Baumbach & Paltrow, 2015 [as of now this is available on Netflix]

The definitive documentaries for the directors of this friend group are basically perfect in their own ways. That this is just De Palma talking about himself and his career and movies, sometimes being incredibly critical of his own work and others. He seems pretty self-aware, probably the most of that group of directors, while still coming across as incredibly cocky. De Palma is perfect for Brian De Palma. However, if anyone wanted to make a 10 hour documentary on Scorsese, Spielberg, Coppola, De Palma and Lucas in this style or it’s just the 5 of them interviewing each other moderated by like Fincher or someone, man....I could really go for that. (I mean if Michael Jordan can get one, why not these guys?)

The Other Director Documentaries

Spielberg, 2017 (HBO) [Interviews and retrospectives about Spielberg’s career, with personal highlights. It’s essentially Spielberg in a nutshell: big, flashy with a lot of time on particular moments that are more important to him than they are to you]

Empire Of Dreams, 2004 (Disney+) [Ostensively this is about Star Wars, and it’s made by a company-man, it says so much about Lucas, a man who hated how institutions told him what he could do so he unintentionally created one that has copied what he hates]

Heart Of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse, 1991 [A truly wild ride, tells you everything you need to know about Coppola]

Italianamerican, 1974 [While a new documentary about Scorsese is probably what I covet most, he’s a pretty open book about his controversies and he’d probably enjoy talking about other people’s work more than his own-catholicism’s a helluva thing]

The Godfather Pt. I & The Godfather Pt. II, Coppola 1972 & 1974

I don’t know if I necessarily endorse watching both of these back-to-back; I guess I’m glad I did it, even if the motivation was mainly to just see if I could. Obviously these movies are important and good and are about so much more than just gangsters and thugs, but a lot of the time it just feels like eating vegetables for me. I did not grow up in a household that emphasized the importance of The Godfather so maybe that’s part of it, but I’m definitely not as dismissive of these as I used to be (though part of that could be the mental Stockholm Syndrome Bill Simmons, Chris Ryan and Sean Fennessey have given me). Once I finished Pt. I, I felt like I could re-watch it; once I finished Pt. II I felt like my eyes were melting out of my head and onto my hands (this could be because I had just watched 377 minutes of a story). I will probably never do it again, unless it’s the weekend after Christmas and AMC is just going for it-at least then I’ll have intermissions every 20 or so minutes telling me to go shop at Target.

0 notes

letterboxd · 4 years

Photo

Love: Anton.

“Anyone that has a creative bone in their body can relate to him and will be inspired to do more.” As the documentary Love, Antosha comes to streaming services, filmmaker Garret Price talks to us about his directorial debut, and what made Anton Yelchin a once-in-a-generation talent.

When Star Trek star and indie film hero Anton Yelchin died in a tragic accident in June 2016 he was just 27 years of age. At the time, he had been preparing his directorial debut, Travis. The feature-length documentary Love, Antosha isn’t interested in exploring Yelchin’s death, however. It is a film about his life, about his boundless talent, which would have led to a long and varied creative career, and about the effect he had on his fellow cast and crew, including Kristen Stewart, Chris Pine and the late Martin Landau.

The deep well of footage in the film was collected throughout Anton’s life by his parents, the Russian-Jewish couple Irina Korina and Viktor Yelchin. They were star figure-skaters for the Leningrad Ice Ballet for fifteen years, before migrating to America to escape religious persecution. Anton was terribly close to his parents and the film takes its title from the sign-off he used in his affectionate letters to his mother.

Love, Antosha premiered to glowing praise from fans and film lovers at the 2019 Sundance Film Festival and again upon its August cinematic release. “This is the only time I’ve fully sobbed in theaters,” Letterboxd member Steven Thomas wrote. While “it [may] not be reinventing the wheel or doing anything new” said Mitchell Beaupre, “it is a really touching and impactful tribute to a tremendous actor, and by all accounts a tremendous person.”

Yelchin’s parents first approached director Drake Doremus to make the documentary, because he had grown close to Anton after the Sundance 2011 smash Like Crazy. Doremus, whose new film Endings, Beginnings had its world premiere at TIFF 2019, felt the project needed a more objective eye. He pulled in Garret Price—primarily known as a film editor for documentaries such as The Director and the Jedi and Janis: Little Girl Blue—with the idea that it would be the perfect project for Price’s first time as a director.

We talked to Garret Price on the eve of the film’s streaming launch.

This film is a celebration of Anton Yelchin’s life, but the knowledge of his death certainly haunts the film. How early on in the process did you decide to not focus on his death until the closing minutes? Garret Price: From the beginning. As I started digging in and learning about him, then talking to everybody, I knew this was a movie about life and how short it is. To me, the death is part of the story, but it’s not what the story is.

I didn’t know Anton, so I was learning about him as I was making this film, and I had to start at the beginning to understand who he was. There were surprises around every corner for me and I wanted to reflect those surprises in the film itself, for people who don’t know much about him, and add layers to somebody who’s already a layered individual.

What do you think it was about Anton that made him stand out in his generation as an actor so uniquely identifiable? As you say, he’s a generational talent. I don’t think you can say he’s just a natural performer. He put the work in. He just studied everything. Anyone that has a creative bone in their body can relate to him and will be inspired to do more like he did.

Also, he never wanted to be the star. He would just be at peace with it all. He was always looking under the hood, constantly talking to the production assistants, the gaffers, the directors of photography, the first assistants. He learned a lot on set.

In the film, Anton rants to his camera about how “you don’t get to make the cinema you want to make”. Is this a sentiment you largely agree with? Yep. Though for him, I don’t think it was necessarily a ‘one for me, one for them’ type thing. He loved making movies. A lot of those bigger films he made did afford him to take more risky projects that were personal, but at the same time it’s tough when you’re putting all this work in and no-one’s seeing it, or it gets bad reviews. It’s gonna eat you alive inside a little bit.

That’s what I loved when we got Willem Dafoe talking about him, because they’re very similar. Willem shared the same feelings, about how just because you take the road less travelled doesn’t mean it’s the road to travel. I think it’s a perfect way to sum up the feelings Anton felt about his choice of projects.

Along with his provocative photography hobby, he was starting to choose melancholic, seedier projects such as Only Lovers Left Alive and Green Room. What do you think drew Anton to the darker side of life? He loved people of all walks of life. He just really latched onto all of the stories and he wanted to find a way to express them. So many people I’ve talked to in this process, especially his friends, would tell me how he would just stop to talk to anyone in the street and ask them questions. He was so present and such a listener.

It’s something about the people’s stories that you don’t get to hear about that he was drawn to, and one way of getting closer to them was the photography. He was taking photographs his whole life but never considered himself a photographer, just like he never considered himself a musician. It was just another outlet for him to express himself.

I assume you watched all of his films. Which was the most impressive of Anton’s performances for you? The one that gutted me the most was Alpha Dog. It’s such an amazing performance. He was fifteen years old at the time and in the documentary we show Anton getting drunk and filming himself to prepare for that role. I was like “wow”.

He was having these life experiences, like getting drunk or having his first kiss on set. He’s a coming-of-age story through the love of making movies and that really interested me. For me, Green Room was showing who he would become as an actor in the years to come. It breaks my heart he couldn’t do that. Also: don’t tell Drake I chose Green Room.

Do you know if there are intentions to complete Anton’s Travis film? Would that simply be too personal for anyone to take over? It’s only 50 pages long and the rest of the movie is in Anton’s head, so he’s the only person who could finish it. Everything he ever did in this business was leading up to directing and if he were alive today he would already have done twenty more movies. He was so prolific.

The late Anton Yelchin, subject of ‘Love, Antosha’.

These types of home-video documentaries should become easier to make with the advent of constant cell-phone footage. But on the other hand, I can’t imagine it having the same warmth as the physical video of the 1990s and early 2000s. How do you feel about the way technology shifts the feel of footage after a certain point in time? I think now, with cellphones, people are always performing, so it doesn’t feel real and authentic compared to the footage I’ve had to work on, even from fifteen to twenty years ago. There’s much more of an emotional connection to these home videos, and not just of Anton, of all of us.

There’s too much narcissism now with selfies and stuff like that. It was a different time with more true-to-life moments. You couldn’t just delete something and do it over and over again until it’s perfect. You weren’t meant to do that, and that’s the beauty of it. I can’t imagine making a portrait-type movie for this generation with the same emotion.

Do you intend to make fiction films or remain a documentarian? I’m an editor by trade. I probably do more fiction than I do documentaries. I’ve been working as a film and TV editor for fifteen years and I go back and forth. I actually think they inform each other, and that freedom is making me a stronger filmmaker.

A lot of fiction films are becoming more documentary-esque, and documentaries are becoming more like fiction films. People like to pigeon-hole certain types of filmmakers and that’s crazy; it’s all storytelling.

What was the film that made you want to make films? That’s tough. Almost Famous was the one that made me think ‘I wanna make movies’. I think that’s my favorite movie of all time. It has everything I like about filmmaking.

‘Love, Antosha’ is available to rent and buy on iTunes and other streaming platforms. Garret Price’s Letterboxd profile is here.

22 notes · View notes

letterboxd · 4 years

Photo

Murder, He Wrote.

“They say casting is 90 percent of directing and it was really true in this case.” Knives Out writer and director Rian Johnson tells us about the intricacies of whodunits, the joys of over-analyzing movies, and—yes—Star Wars.

From Hercule Poirot’s debut in an Agatha Christie novel in 1920, to the hard-boiled detectives of the 1930s, to the Pink Panther comedies, the whodunit was a perennially popular film genre—until its decline in the 1980s, when true-crime re-enactments took over. But, with Knives Out, writer/director Rian Johnson (Looper, Star Wars: The Last Jedi) is on a mission to reaffirm the whodunit’s rightful place on the big screen—and casually reinvent the form while he’s at it.

Knives Out has a gobsmacking ensemble, with Christopher Plummer (as writer Harlan Thrombey, the victim), Ana de Armas (as Marta, Thrombey’s nurse and confidant), Daniel Craig (as Benoit Blanc, the famous private detective who shows up to query Thrombey’s apparent suicide), and Lakeith Stanfield (as the investigating Lieutenant Elliott). Making up Thrombey’s extended, entitled family are Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson, Chris Evans, Michael Shannon, Toni Collette, Riki Lindhome, K Callan, Katherine Langford and Jaeden Martell—all well fed by his wealth and determined to protect their piece of it.

It’s a Rian Johnson movie, so Noah Segan shows up as well, in perhaps his meatiest role yet, as a cop working with Stanfield. There’s also a delightful cameo from Frank Oz.

Rian Johnson directs Ana de Armas on the set of ‘Knives Out’.

Despite the lack of big-screen whodunits of late, there’s no shortage of audience enthusiasm for them, as evidenced by our ‘Murder Mystery’ Showdown, a great starting point for anyone looking to delve into the genre. Letterboxd members who have already seen Knives Out are very much enjoying what they see, with the film boasting a giant 4.2 average rating (at time of writing).

This is one of those films where you can just tell how much fun the cast is having, an aspect that Letterboxd member Wes nails in his review: “I’d really, really, really like to believe that Rian Johnson gathered all these actors in this giant house, hid some cameras everywhere, hit record, and none of what we saw was fictitious.”

Demi Adejuyigbe writes—in his charming Letterboxd review of the time he lunched with Johnson (!)—that the film is “absofuckinglutely phenomenal”. He marvels at how Knives Out stays one step ahead of what we expect from a whodunit: “How do you fool an audience that has come to be fooled? Johnson is so deftly able to get that joyful, wondrous reaction out of me by expertly controlling every aspect of the script and the direction in a way that makes it clear he sees the entire process as a symphony that he’s conducting, where the audience is just another instrument being played.”

Or perhaps Patrick Willems best encapsulates the joys of the film when he writes that Knives Out is “a movie as good as its sweaters (the sweaters are excellent)”. (The most popular sweater has its own story, here.)

When we got in a room with Rian Johnson recently, we naturally wanted to learn how he juggled such an impressive ensemble whilst navigating the twists, turns, and more twists of Knives Out’s plot.

Chris Evans and Ana de Armas wearing sweaters, Rian Johnson not wearing a sweater, on the set of ‘Knives Out’.

You’ve often talked about your lifelong love of the whodunit genre. How did you go about making your own? Rian Johnson: It’s very interesting, the whodunit genre. It’s one of my favorite genres. I love all the things about it. I also kind of agree with Hitchcock. Hitchcock hated the whodunit genre. To Hitchcock, the danger of the whodunit is: it’s a lot of build-up for one big surprise at the end, and that’s not very satisfying or fun. That’s why he was all about suspense. He would give the audience information early and then you’re in suspense and not just crime-solving. He would also mislead the audience, so you’d think you’re getting all the information early. And enough so that you’re leaning forward, you’re not sitting back. That’s Hitchcock’s whole deal.

So for me, what was interesting is: can I put the engine of a Hitchcock thriller in the middle of a whodunit? Have a whodunit that then turns into a Hitchcock thriller that turns back into a whodunit? That was kind of the starting point for me, from a genre-wonk point of view.

So then I started filling out, okay what would that actually mean? I’m talking around it because I don’t wanna spoil anything, but, okay if we did this and then that could be interesting. And then I started zooming in bit by bit and filling out what characters I would need for what plot points. All the details come later but it’s as ‘big picture’ as that.

Jamie Lee Curtis, Christopher Plummer, Don Johnson and Michael Shannon in ‘Knives Out’.

Were there ever any alternative outcomes in play? Not really, because I didn’t really work, like, “if this happens, then that happens, then that happens”. I worked it like a satellite map. I zoomed back. I work in little notebooks and I have to draw one line and see the entire plot along that line. So it’s not like a game of Clue where I can pick out different solutions at the end; it’s kind of set because the shape of the whole thing determines a different kind of ending from the very inception of it.

Watching this, I thought about your film The Brothers Bloom, as that’s another ode to a somewhat specific genre—the con-artist film—in which your affection for that kind of film was also evident. How challenging is it to write and shoot films in genres you grew up loving? Any time I’m attacking a genre it’s because I deeply, deeply love it. The heart of it for me is always trying to distill the thing I love about it and set that as the goal-post and then find my own way to it. Whether it’s the con-man movie with The Brothers Bloom, or Star Wars as a genre, or this, it’s always about trying to get to the heart of what I love about something and then trying to put that on the screen so the audience will have as pure an experience of it as possible. And sometimes to give the audience the purest experience, you have to shake it a little bit, because… we’ve seen so many versions of it over the years that the audience can kind of ignore it. So sometimes you have to put it in a different context, like with Brick, with film noir or something. But the intent is always to give the audience the most sharp and vivid experience of what’s at the heart of it for me.

This film is a blockbuster of chemistry. Was it difficult to cast? Once we got Daniel on board, no. Once he was the centerpiece, I think everyone wants to work with him so it was like a snowball. Because then we got Michael Shannon, and everyone wants to work with him. And Lakeith Stanfield. So, no, the cast came together very, very quickly, just like everything else in this project. With these actors, my job is easy. They show up on set, they clicked in so easily. They’re such pros. They say casting is 90 percent of directing and it was really true in this case.

Lakeith Stanfield, Noah Segan and Daniel Craig in ‘Knives Out’.

Speaking of Daniel Craig, his character is a microcosm of the film in that he is not in any way like any detective that has come before, yet you cannot help but think of precedents. Were you consciously trying to make him unlike Hercule Poirot? When I started writing, I actually kinda got myself in trouble because I was thinking too much about Poirot. I love Poirot so much and I think I was thinking too much like: how do I make my Poirot? And so I started doing all this sort of quirky stuff, and throwing all these quirks in there, like maybe he has an eye patch and a peg leg maybe. It was just silly. And so finally I said “this is so stupid”, and I pulled all that stuff and I just said: “I’m gonna write this character very straightforward. The way that he needs to be for the script. And I’m gonna give him a Southern accent, because then he’s a fish out of water in New England. And then whoever I cast, I’m gonna believe that they’re gonna inhabit that character in such a way that he’ll be unique.”

I think what Daniel found—that is exactly what is at the heart of Poirot—is Daniel found kind of what’s funny about the character. Beyond the accent. He found the self-inflated, clownish aspect of him, while still maintaining a humanity and an intelligence, which is really what Poirot is. It’s why Peter Ustinov is my favorite Poirot—he gets what’s funny about the character. And like Columbo or like Miss Marple or any of the great fictional detectives, it’s that element that makes you not quite take him seriously until it’s too late and they’ve solved the whole case. I think that’s what Daniel keyed into more than anything else.

This feels like a film that people are going to pore over the details of, as they did with Looper. I love it because that’s part of what I love about those kinds of movies. First of all, let’s separate them, because with time-travel movies, the notion that a time-travel movie can make sense is absolute nonsense. So time travel is much more like the spells in Harry Potter than science, and anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. Except maybe Shane Carruth. Shane is the one person who can actually figure out time travel. Everyone else, it’s kind of like a fantasy element more than anything else.

Ana de Armas in ‘Knives Out’.

So with Looper, I felt like I had to have it make narrative sense, but I didn’t feel the pressure of it having to work in every little detail, because it can’t. Whereas, it’s a little different with a whodunit because every screw has to be tightened and I can’t leave any loose ends. I do want people to be able to re-watch and dig in. But I’ll be a little more sad if they find things that don’t make sense. I’m sure they will, but it’ll actually make me a little sad if they do, because I’ll be like: “I messed up there”.

How do you feel about your films being subjected to that kind of scrutiny? I think it’s fun! That’s the thing: for a certain kind of moviegoer, that’s the pleasure you get—it’s almost like the kid who if you hand them a radio, you’re gonna wanna take it apart. If that’s what someone loves about watching a movie then I think that’s fantastic. I’ve done that with certain films. I’ve watched them over and over and tried to analyze, so I get [that] that’s part of the pleasure of it.

How are you feeling about your Star Wars experience? As a filmmaker, as a Star Wars lover, it was the best experience of my life. Everything about it. Writing it. Making it. The people I got to meet. The places I got to go. The experience I had putting it out. The last two years interacting with the fans has been so rewarding and so fantastic.

I feel like I always have to say that the bad part of that gets written about a lot because it’s interesting to write about. From being in the middle of the hurricane, I can tell you that 95 percent of my interactions with fans are absolutely lovely. That’s not to say they all even like the movie—some of them don’t, or some of them have issues with the film—but they’re all engaged and respectful and so deeply engaged in it in a way that when you make movies you only dream that people will engage with something that you made on that level. So no, for me, the whole thing top-to-bottom has been the most beautiful experience I can possibly imagine.

Rian Johnson directs Joonas Suotamo on the set of ‘Star Wars: The Last Jedi’.

Something that I know in my bones from being a Star Wars fan since I was five years old: everybody has a slightly different version of what Star Wars is to them, absolutely. That’s why I’m excited that stuff like [new Disney+ series] The Mandalorian can exist. The more Star Wars stuff we make, the more there’s gonna be a spectrum that gives different people the things that they want. But we also have to recognize that nothing is gonna give everybody what they want, and somebody is always gonna be upset.

What George Lucas did originally was make a movie that was straight from his heart, and expressed exactly what this world was to him. And expressed emotional truths in this world in a way that was resonant for him personally. I feel that every filmmaker who comes to Star Wars, that’s their job. Their job is not to take a survey and to see what is going to have the broadest demographic appeal. Their job is to speak from their heart and make a thing that resonates with what Star Wars is for them. And I think the more diverse filmmakers we have doing that, the more diverse Star Wars movies we’ll have, the more people will hopefully be happy and the less yelling there’ll be all around.

‘Knives Out’ is now in theaters. Comments have been edited for clarity and length. With thanks to Studiocanal.

5 notes · View notes

letterboxd · 5 years

Photo

The Missing Linklater.

“Any time I’m on a set with Rick I feel very fortunate.” We talk to the writers behind Richard Linklater’s new missing-person feature film, Where’d You Go, Bernadette?

An adaptation of Maria Semple’s 2012 comedic novel about a reclusive architect who goes missing just before a family trip to Antarctica, Where’d You Go, Bernadette? stars Cate Blanchett in the title role. Bernadette’s daughter Bee (Emma Nelson) sets out on a quest to find her, with Bernadette’s husband Elgie (Billy Crudup). Laurence Fishburne, Judy Greer and Kristen Wiig also star.

Directed by American filmmaking icon (and co-founder of the Austin Film Society) Richard Linklater, the screenplay was co-written with his frequent collaborators (and married couple) Holly Gent Palmo and Vincent Palmo Jr. If their names are not familiar as scriptwriters, that’s because they usually work further behind the scenes for Linklater, and have been since 1993’s Dazed and Confused, when Holly was a production coordinator, and Vince a second second assistant director.

Vince became Linklater’s first AD for the films Bad News Bears, Fast Food Nation, A Scanner Darkly, Before Midnight, Boyhood, Last Flag Flying and Where’d You Go, Bernadette?. Holly co-produced Linklater’s Me and Orson Welles (2008), which she also wrote with Vince.

Reviewing Where’d You Go, Bernadette? on Letterboxd, Tom suggests that after a “generic” opening, the film “slowly starts to show its true colors as the character of Bernadette is unwrapped… it’s a story that is touching and even a bit inspiring for those who aspire to be their own artist in life.” J Oled agrees: “This could’ve been a Hallmark special, but because Linklater generally loves humanity, and is always experimenting, this film is quite watchable, it’s warm, relatable, and modest, and I wasn’t asking for much else.” Melissa, who has read the novel, offers: “If you’re a fan of the book… the movie is starkly different. But if you’re a fan of Linklater… you’re going to love it. Cate Blanchett may be the best actor of the decade.”

We spoke to Holly Gent Palmo and Vincent Palmo Jr. about their collaborative writing process with Linklater, mining their own relationship for inspiration, and making films for the social-media age.

Cate Blanchett as Bernadette and Emma Nelson as Bee.

How you were brought onto the project? Holly Gent Palmo: We have worked with Rick [Linklater] for many years. We first met on Dazed and Confused, where we were on the crew, and we’ve worked on many projects with him. He’s one of our close friends. He was brought onto the project and then we read the book and loved it so he brought us on. We started from scratch, it was all based on the novel.

What did you relate to in the book that made you feel you had the right perspective to take it on? HGP: This is a movie that for me personally is very relatable because it’s about a woman who has really lost herself in motherhood and as much as she loves that journey, she’s also really looking to rediscover her passion of her past creative impulses. I think that’s something that Rick, Vince, and I all can relate to, not only as parents, but also as people trying to do something creative in this world.

Was the book’s author Maria Semple involved at all? HGP: First of all, the novel is fantastic.

Vincent Palmo Jr: Love the book, love the book.

HGP: Maria knows so much about the filmmaking process and has that history herself that she knew that she wanted to hand it off to Rick. She talked to Cate and she talked to Rick but she did not take part in the writing.

Richard Linklater seems like a great writer to collaborate with. What is it about him that makes that operate so well? HGP: With Rick, the way we work is that we talk a lot in the beginning and clearly discuss every aspect of the book. This one was particularly challenging in that it was a modern epistolary novel told in emails and transcripts. It’s not a straight narrative and it’s not told in a linear fashion, necessarily. So we had to sort out the chronology of our story and what would be included.

Screenwriters Holly Gent Palmo and Vincent Palmo Jr. / Photo: Wilson Webb/Annapurna Pictures

It’s the way he works with actors and everyone. It’s a really respectful, really collaborative process where everybody gets to bring to the table their own personal point of view in their own lives. With Rick, we dove into the parts of the novel we liked best and what threads we were going to pick up and carry through.

VP: It was a pretty deep exploration of the novel, of all the different characters and situations. We talked through all that and came to an agreement between the three of us for what we felt said the themes best.

Vincent, you’re also Linklater’s first assistant director, which is an interesting combination of multi-tasking. On set, would you pitch in on the script-side? VP: No, on set as a first AD I’m more concerned about the day’s work and really having everything in place and ready to go so Rick just has to say “action” and “cut”. I don’t talk at all about the script. At that point we’re all dialed in anyway.

When Holly’s around they have their conferences and I’ll be arranging the next set up. I’ve done a lot of things with Rick. I did all twelve years of Boyhood. There’s a shorthand there that I’m intent and focused on each day’s shoot and what’s coming up the next day.

HGP: By the time Rick gets to set, he’s totally prepared and ready. He has his rehearsal process with his actors. Our process is over, he’s very sure of what he wants.

VP: You can’t over-prepare, but we’re very prepared.

HGP: Except maybe in a rare instance in having to negotiate some small change.

VP: Yeah, like in what the weather’s brought or something new at a location, things like that.

Boyhood and Before Midnight are both classics of their decade now. What were those sets like? VP: I’m so happy for Rick [that they’re highly regarded]. Boyhood just stretched on. I remember there were times where we were like, “is somebody in Eastern Europe doing the same thing and it’s going to come out before us?!” We really didn’t know.

To pick it up each year and shoot it on film when all that kind of change [to digital] was in the midst of us shooting… Any time I’m on a set with Rick I feel very fortunate. To see them received in the way they were, it’s really thrilling.

Emma Nelson and Billy Crudup in ‘Where’d You Go, Bernadette?’.

In what ways, if any, did you adapt your style to the talents of Cate Blanchett and the other cast members? HGP: We knew that Cate was interested from the moment that we began. We were always hoping to do justice to her great talent and thinking towards that. To me, there could be no-one better in that role. Cate brings so much to it.

It’s an inspiration to think that no matter what kind of nuanced emotion we write in a scene, she can carry it and do an incredible job. It gives a freedom of inspiration thinking that there’s a possibility that Cate Blanchett can be playing the part.

The book is largely renowned for the way it captures the nuances of Seattle. What types of research did you do for the characters’ occupations and their environments? HGP: Rick did a lot of interesting, in-depth research for Elgie’s technology role and the kind of things he was developing. He talked to a lot of people involved in Microsoft developing those sorts of things, to bring that in the most detailed and up-to-date way.

For architecture, Rick arranged some meetings with some really great architects to go and talk to them about the language they use. As far as Seattle goes, there’s no greater resource for that than the novel itself. Maria really knows that world and has so many funny and interesting outsider opinions about it that I felt it was the perfect way to learn about that.

What did you feel you could bring to the element of marriage when writing as a married couple? HGP: That’s interesting.

VP: That is interesting. Well, we’ve been married for 26 years.

HGP: I do think that all three of us brought in our past relationships and our current relationships to the process. I believe it’s a realistic portrayal of the quest to keep improving your life through self-discovery. It’s a unique story that you don’t really see a lot of.

That whole idea that you can’t ever really know anyone, but that doesn’t mean you can’t try—Rick really loved those words, they’re the opening words of the novel. It’s this idea that the other person is always somewhat unknowable, but you keep trying to get to know each other while you change through the years.

VP: The search continues! You find new things.

HGP: Nothing is more rewarding in life than those close relationships that last decades.

Richard Linklater, Emma Nelson, Cate Blanchett and Billy Crudup at a New York screening earlier this month. / Photo: Evan Agostini/Invision/AP

Do you think it’s difficult to write contemporary films for the social-media age? HGP: It’s fascinating when you see movies and there’s this before-and-after cell phones dividing line, because so many of the great films and their plots would have been so different if everyone was carrying a phone around.

I don’t know if it’s easier, but it is a change in your way of thinking as you realize everyone has a phone in their pocket. I think both [period and contemporary] are fun. Any kind of story or plot that you’re trying to figure out is a really fun and challenging puzzle. I notice in a lot of films they try and get rid of the phone in some way.

What was the film that got you into filmmaking and made you want to be a part of this industry? VP: Oh my gosh, wow. Jeez, that’s a really tough one.

HGP: There’s so many stages to it. There’s the ones you see when you’re a little kid that just blow you over. Those are so bound with light and emotion that you don’t even understand. I remember Apocalypse Now—that was something that blew my mind.

VP: It just kind of builds. I got a degree in journalism and then I ended up working in film so it’s hard to point to just one that really flipped the switch. I don’t know why, but I saw The Sound of Music a bunch of times when I was younger. Maybe it was just easier for my mom to take me and my four siblings out to see it.

‘Where’d You Go, Bernadette?’ is in select US cinemas now.

#richard linklater #austin film society #holly gent #vincent palmo jr #seattle #where'd you go bernadette #maria semple #billy crudup #emma nelson #austin #letterboxd

4 notes · View notes