Better tomorrow than today

PÖFF post


As much as I try to avoid seeing depressing stuff at PÖFF I didn't this time manage. Well,  as far as depressing human dramas about teenage girls go this one was pretty good. I'm just honestly not sure if I liked it more, because it was good or because it was Korean and I enjoy anything from these parts of Asia more.

It didn't depress me terribly, but neither was it fun. Neither was it boring, stuff happened and I was reasonably engaged even if I didn't like any of the characters a whole lot. There were some nice ones. There were some I hated. One in particular. The mother. The dad and his family were very nice. It was okay. I liked how the main character had a very consistent clothing style and I liked the insight into this part of Korean life, education and problems. Provided it was realistic. Which it seemed to be, but then again Estonian life always seems more depressing in Estonian cinema, so who knows.

King Cnut

PÖFF post

This film is absolutely brilliant.  I saw it as part of PÖFF, but if you have the chance to see it -  Go for it. It easily the best documentary I have ever seen. I like the Fashion Cinema programme at PÖFF anyways and I like this sort of classic fashion cinema documentaries too, but this was something totally different and man was it wonderful. I liked the topic of copyright  laws and parodying itself, but the fact that it's sort of a comedy documentary makes it so unique and wonderful. Those are not the two things you'd think to combine easily.

I think the storytelling was amazing. To the point where I started to almost wonder if they manipulated the truth to get a more captivating narrative. It was fantastic, fun, clever and everything wrapped up really nicely. It is a classic David and Goliath story and man was it satisfying. One man goes against a giant corporation in his own unique, witty and clever way and doesn't completely fail. Justice prevails! More or less.

Also, to look at this critically - it's a hell of a good advertising for his clothing brand.

But really, it was awesome and it was great to have the main character (you can't really call him an actor when it's a documentary) and the director there as well.

Mother!

Well, let me tell you - if you like close-ups of Jennifer Lawrence you will love this film. I like Jennifer Lawrence rather a lot, but I must admit the constant close-ups gave me a bit of headache.

Otherwise I loved the aesthetics of this movie. I generally don't like it when all people talk about after seeing a movie are the clothes the people wore or the rooms and landscapes it was all filmed in, but I loved the fact that this film had a very constant colour theme that was really noticable and cool. I liked that the main character had a very distinct style of clothing, despite the fact that it didn't fall under any pre-established style category. I mean that she wasn't a goth or something similar. Her clothes were very casual, but she still had a style.

I also liked the effects, they were very - effective and different from any I had seen. Visually the film was very very pleasing. 

Did I actually like the film as a whole now? I think I did. Maybe. The story wasn't too pleasant and if it hadn't been told so beautifully and visually I wouldn't have liked it. It had some metaphors and sub-text and hidden meanings into it, but they were very unclear and difficult to decode. You might think that's the point, but with some movies its very easy to think of things that the author might have meant. Here, you wonder of they tried too hard.

i liked the ending, it was satisfying, but I think, once again, more visually, than story-wise

Paris can wait

This film ... was not my cup of tea. I'm not saying it was bad. Although I think if it had been exceptionally good I would have enjoyed it despite the drama/romance genre. I can, after all, enjoy such films as well.

This, however, it was pretty average. Not terrible, but not good enough to make me feel it was worth my time. Perhaps I was not its target audience, but I feel that in a good film we can relate to all kinds of characters.

I found nothing relatable in this. Nothing. I didn't really like any of the characters. I couldn't relate to any. The main lead pissed me off, because I would have done everything completely differently that her and as a result her actions irritated me. I don't watch a lot of romantic drama and yet nothing about this felt particularly fresh.  Once again, I can't say it was bad - there were some cool visuals, some neat ideas, a lot of nice food. I just didn't like it.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle

Honestly, I didn't expect to love it as much as I loved the first part and went into it thinking:"Ah, I bet this won't be as good as the first one." But really - I think it was pretty much just as good. It was - similar. I even liked the callbacks to the originals, the scene that was the same, but the outcome was different. It was clever.  Sure, they used some famous people like Elton John purely because they can do that now with the first part having been successful, but I don't really mind.

I was skeptical about them bringing Harry (Colin Firth) back and how they would do it, but I think plot-wise it was just plausible enough and didn't feel like a huge cop-out. And really, the film doesn't hold very well without him. He is just an amazing actor. Julianne Moore was really great too.

Fun, enjoyable watching, the plot was pretty cool too, it had some tropes, some things you could expect, but it was a fairly clever jab at the US president at least.

The Square

I went into this with high expectations. I heard great things about this film from a person who sees a lot of cinema and reviews films for a living so when she was in love with it I decided to check it out.

It's one of those rare films that is both artsy, different, unique and..fascinating, thrilling and actually relateable.  It has a plot, that moves, for a most part, with a pleasant speed. It grabs your attention, there is something everyone can relate to or at least - recognize and say:"Yes, I know other people like that."

It's interesting, multi-layered and has a lot going on in it. The characters are just likeable enough that you can feel a bit sorry for them here and there. I wouldn't call it a comedy. It is classified as one, but it certainly isn't the sort of humour that makes you laugh. It's dark, satirical and certainly very clever and intelligent, but I didn't feel in any way uplifted or humoured leaving the cinema. It is obviously a great movie. Anyone can tell you that, it was awarded highly at Cannes after all, but better than that (for me personally), it was one that I actually liked.

Kedi

I got into the mood for a bit of an indie...ish - film (not a Hollywood blockbuster) for this, picked a day when I felt I was in the right mood for it. I read a review - it was great and the film was shown not only in the art-film cinemas here, but in the more mainstream ones too, so surely, it must be great. It's about cats, after all. I love cats. What could go wrong?

Well, apparently - a lot of things. It was - boring. Plain and simple. At the start I was excited, by the end I was squirming in my seat wondering when would it end. One could say that Hollywood movies with their flashy fast-paced images has spoiled me. But no - I'm not sure that's the issue here. The film had no narrative. No one storyline to tie together the small bits, the stories of all the cats. If there was one it was so loose, it didn't do it's job. It felt like a small TV-series with each bit of the film being an episode about a certain cat(s) and a human connected to the cat(s). It got old, repetitive and there were a lot of issues I would have liked a closer look at, a more in-depth discussion of, but that were just briefly mentioned. All and all, not my favorite kind of film.

Spider-man: homecoming

Sometimes it's just nice to go and see a nice entertaining movie. It's nice when you go and expect something good, mildly amusing and nice and you get just that. Not a masterpiece, but something that you can just enjoy and forgive some small flaws to, because it's entertaining. And that is what that movie is.

It was almost a little shocking that this wasn't an origin story. I was mildly disoriented by the fact for a moment, but really it was great and refreshing. I liked the story. Liked that everything was already established, because really - we all know how Peter Parker becomes Spiderman by now. I felt that Peter was pretty in character too.

Baywatch

It's a funny film. Not by any means a masterpiece, not even a great movie, but an enjoyable and entertaining one. It's just fun. The humor is a bit grotesque and not the kind you want to admit you laugh at, but you laugh at it anyways.

It's so over the top, so silly and it knows it. It doesn't take itself seriously at all and that's what makes it an honest fun movie. The small cameos from Pamela Anderson & David Hasselhoff feel a bit forced, but they are appreciated and I liked the fact that while the main character is called Mitch, David Hasselfoff's character is also called Mitch and not something else. Although I don't particularly get why or how they have the same name, but it wasn't particularly bothersome.

Wonder Woman

I honestly didn't have much expectations in terms that I had no idea what this film would be about - other than Wonder Woman. I had heard great things about it through, about how empowering it felt for women and great.

It was pretty good. The plot was consistent, there was one. It was pretty logical. For most part. I don't really understand why Diana couldn't return to the amazons once she left, but maybe I should have read the comics. There were visual inconsistencies - a mug being in once place in one shot and in other in other. But these were small mistakes that I didn't even notice, and wouldn't have noticed, if they weren't pointed out to me.

I think the actors were pretty good. Our leading actress fit into her role well and I liked the amazons. They didn't look too young, nor did they look old. They looked kind of perfectly ageless if that makes sense, somewhere between old and young.

I don't think this film was that groundbreaking in other ways. Sure, Diana seems like a very headstrong and independent woman - for the early 20th century where she is thrown into. I think she is all that by the modern standards too, but I wish they would have tried to show her as an independent strong woman in the 21st century, where all other characters aren't comically and pointedly not feminists. It feels like a bit of a cheat.

The ending was cliche'd and perhaps the most boring part of the film. The moral was so worn-out that there were holes through it. It wasn't wrong, just over-exploited.  All in all there was little that felt new. Besides a female heroine.

JAFF Post: Гофманиада

I saw this film as part of the Japanese Anime and Lifestyle Festival in Tallinn.

This is one of those films I am in such an awe of that I kind of don't feel fit to criticize it. It's a piece of art and I think it really doesn't deserve any bad things to be said about it. The animation is beautiful, the varying styles that are put together are interesting. It's an unfinished film still as it is of now, but it felt coherent and whole enough that you could get the story if you bothered to pay attention.

The way the real world melts to one with the artist's fantasies and hallucinations is brilliantly done and captivating.

Even the documentary bit that was shown afterwards was interesting and I am usually not a big fan of those "Behind the scenes" bits unless I'm a huge fan of whatever is shown. Sometimes even then. But this was fast-paced and not overly self-indulgent. It was still apparent that the whole thing was done with a lot of love, patience and passion.

The only real bit of criticism I have is that I don't think it ties in with the Festival. It's a Russian animation and it's a bit out of place at a Japanese Anime Film Festival. Regardless, if they had this exclusive chance to show it I see why they would want to and it was an amazing animation plus the the chance to meet the director and the producer is always appreciated.

Ghost in The Shell (The live-action film)

I actually prepared for this movie. I watched the first anime to have a good feel of the original material. I wanted to see it before I saw this. I had low expectations, because I had heard many bad things about it, but once again, I don't think it was as bad as people make it out to be.

It has a totally different feel than the anime. It's less subtle, less deep. It demands less of the viewer than the original. Watching the anime I constantly felt like I had to think, fill in the gaps. Hollywood movies don't do that. They spell everything out for you. But I actually liked some of the scenes they added. The bit where Batou lost his eyes. It made me want to read the manga and find out of they took the scene from there or came up with it themselves.

I also liked the addition of Major's mom. It added a bit of that Hollywood-ish Happy End to the mix, but it wasn't sickeningly sweet. It worked. It was well made. There weren't too many words, it wasn't overly spelled out and that's why it worked.

Scarlet isn't a bad actor. She does her best. Does she capture the essence of the character? Does it feel like the same character? Not to me...I just think this role needs a Japanese woman.

I liked the Japanese guy there was. The one who actually spoke Japanese, but it kind of made it even more clear the film was kind of racist.

The city they were in was weird too. In the original it feels like they are in Japan. In the movie it's some weird futuristic city and one doesn't really get if they are Japan or America or in some new weird country.

I liked that they didn't make it very Matrix-like. The original was older than Matrix, but it still reminds people of it and had the film used that esthetic too much it would have looked like a knock-off.

I liked that a lot of scenes were visually incredibly similar to the anime. The plot was different, but not terrible. Not as good, sure, but you can't make a greater thing out of something that was already brilliant.

In conclusion: Watch the original, but if you're interested give this movie a try too.

Beauty and the Beast

Assuming some of you read this blog regularly you may remember that Cinderella was the first film I ever reviewed here. I didn't really like it.

This, I loved. One might argue that it's cheap to make a film that counts on the young adults feeling nostalgic seeing it, but I think this is how you should make a live action film based on animation. It stayed true to the original and the things it added helped to fix up some of the plot holes people have long been wondering about. Questions like: "Who is Belle's mother and why doesn't anyone remember there used to be a prince living in a castle or wonder about what happened to the royal family? Is all the furniture in the castle alive?" are wittily answered.

I liked the add-on of the fact that if the last petal of the rose falls the enhanced servants would all turn into things forever. Inanimate objects. That being said, I think the reason as to why the servants ever deserved to be cursed was never very well given, the movie tried to offer something there too, but I don't think it was convincing.

I didn't grow up with the Beauty and The Beast animated film, I simply had the classic Disney-style book of it, but even I somehow knew these classic sings by now and I'm so glad they kept them! The songs were great. The new added songs were cool too, although I preferred the old ones. They haunted me for days. The added bits, like Belle being an inventor ,were cool too. Gaston was so perfectly cast! The casting was good all-in-all, but man, Gaston! He looks like he jumped out of that animation.

The visuals were gorgeous. I especially liked Lumiere's design. Then again I always liked him in the original too.

Logan

I had great expectations for this film. I had heard that it was the best of the Wolverine movies and while I hadn't managed to see any of those I have at least seen all of the main X-men movies and liked them if not loved them.

I could see why this film was said to be different from the rest. It really stood up from the rest of the X-men franchise and I sat in the cinema hall wondering if that was a good or a bad thing. By the end of the screening I decided that it wasn't or at least that I didn't like it.

While I applaud Marvel's effort to do something different, something that doesn't come off as a regular super hero film, in this case they didn't pull it off. They tried so hard to make a realistic drama that was still a superhero film that in my opinion they managed neither very well.

From this point on there are major spoilers ahead! Read at your own risk!



I liked the first half of the movie just fine. There was a lot of gore, but it still seemed the film was on to something. There were good domestic scenes, interesting storyline. Then everything turned into a pretty awful bloodbath.

Dear film industry, please get over the notion that the more death and sadness you put into a film the more artistic it gets. It's not just an issue this film has, but this film certainly has it. I personally thought the ending was crap. Was the death of Logan and Charles unexpected of a superhero movie? Yes. Did it make it a good film? No. In fact it ruined it. You killed all of the likeable characters. At the end of the film you have a bunch of kids whose only redeeming quality is that they are children. Most of them we haven't met until 30 minutes ago and as characters, they are undeveloped and I'd quite possible not care at all if most of them dropped dead.
It wasn't a terrible movie, but the more I thought about it the less I liked it.

Lego Batman

I saw this film as a bit of a rebellious act against some people that I've recently spoken to and who were very strongly against seeing any sort of mainstream films due to them only re-enforcing stereotypes and being rubbish. So I sort of felt the need to see something screamingly mainstream.

I was very positively surprised by this film. I didn't have any expectations for it. I hadn't heard anything of it, positive or negative and I thought it was lovely. A nice proper bit of parody, similar to Deadpool in a way, but there was a lot less fourth-wall breaking and a lot more references to pop culture. If you like that sort of references and even, one might say, crossovers, this is the film for you. The jokes are funny and quite witty, it's a children's movie, but the jokes rarely resort to any sort of low humour, no farts or poops, which is always good. If you can, see it in English, I had to see it in Estonian dub and I feel like some of the humour was lost even if it was a good film.

I'm not sure if things happening in the lego universe add much to the plot or anything to the movie. I suppose it helps with the way the ending works out and makes animating easier. It's fun, lovely, clever and certainly worth a watch.

Fifty shades darker

I thought I would start this blog entry with some sarcastic condescending comment about how I'll try and give a proper review to something that can't even be called a movie, but - you know what? It wasn't that bad.

Just as some films are terribly overhyped others are overly put down and trampled on. It was an okay movie. By no means was it a cinematic masterpiece, but I went in expecting very little and feeling very critical and I came out thinking that - yeah, I could see the third movie too.

Ana's and Christian's relationship gets bashed a lot too and admittedly Mr. Grey deserves some of the critique he gets, that being said, his love for Ana does seem genuine and not as selfish in comparison to the last movie. He tries to take Ana's feelings into account and show her the depth of his feelings in more meaningful ways than flaunting around his dollar-bills. (Although he does some of that too, it seems). Besides, if you compare Grey to all of the absolute perverts who surround Ana, in this universe were all men are pigs, he becomes strangely likeable. It might not excuse him completely, but it does make you root for her.

Ana comes off as strangely empowering in this world of absolute weird bastards. She kicks one of them in the balls and doesn't let herself taken advantage of her as easily as she did in the first movie. I think. She's intelligent and sweet, understanding and forgiving, whether or not she is too much so, is up to your interpretation.

In conclusion - I wouldn't have gone to see it myself, but it was not by far the worst film I've seen. I love that it's so unashamedly an erotic love story (Yes, I think they love each other). It doesn't try to be art. Of course. Why would I even suggest that it does? Because so many other films that come far closer to being mindless porn than Fifty Shades Darker ever does, try to claim that they are artistic. That the sick twisted sex scenes have a deeper meaning and if you don't think they do you're too stupid as an audience member to get it. I'm looking at you Lars Von Trier. This movie is what it is. It knows that it's mainstream and I think it does a pretty good job.

Oh and the soundtrack is amazing. The sex scenes do get a little repetitive after a while. There is only so much you can show in a Hollywood film. Not a lot apparently. It doesn't get gross or repulsive, just a little annoying and boring.

Passengers

Recently someone who was studying scriptwriting was giving a talk in my class and thy told us how writing for a movie was different than writing in books, because in film you can't show character's inner thoughts and struggles. It all has to be dialogue and can't all be very deeply psychological.

Now I'd like to shove this film into their faces and ask how the hell is it possible then? It is a brilliant masterpiece. Touching, deep, well-written, well-acted, well paced. I am honestly having trouble pointing out any grand faults with it. There were things that bothered me, but overall the piece is stunning.

So Jim wakes up on a space ship. All seems well until it becomes clear that he is the only one away and there are almost a hundred years still left to travel...

A big chunk of the story is told with only one human character. A difficult task indeed, made somewhat easier by the appearance of a human-like robot. The said robot, Arthur, is actually possibly my favorite character despite being a plot device for a large part. He doesn't really feel like an easy cop out either, because as a robot - well, he only seems like a slightly improved Siri. He is fun to be around, friendly and likeable, just like Siri is in my opinion. But no matter how long you talk to Siri you never really forget that in the end you are just talking to your phone. Arthur is adorable, but does never really feel too human and I love that. The acting here is also one worthy of an Academy Award.

So we are still left with only one main character for a while and his inner struggles and thoughts and feelings are so brilliantly portrayed - without any narration!

Now to the stuff that did bother me. There are 3 human characters in this film and one of them is a plot device. Honestly I can't even remember his name anymore, because all he was was a plot device. Not a badly written one, but you can tell that he was only ever needed to advance the story in ways in which just having Aurora and Jim there couldn't have happened.

Another question that rises is - why don't they return to Earth? Some answer is given to this, but it sounds like a very unbelievable one. They say it would get as long to get back as it does to go forward and add something about the time it takes to turn the ship around, but that does not seem logical. It is a small thing, but one that has stuck with me.

All in all the film is truly brilliant. The characters and their struggles feel realistic, the acting is fantastic, the story is really fantastically told. It is hard to tell a story with just two people and for the most part this film manages it.