The Reel Nerds are joined by Ska-documentary filmmaker Aaron Pendergast when they master-build a review of John Wick 2 and The Lego Batman Movie.
If you’d like to contribute to Aaron’s campaign for Of Mics and Men: The Summer of Ska, you can find it here on Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/577151241/of-mics-and-men-the-summer-of-ska?ref=nav_search
You know how when you’re wanting to go to the movie theater and you look up all the films that are showing and there are alway at least three that you’ve never heard of, let alone have any interest in seeing? Well, good news! I’ve seen those movies. I spend most of my theater experiences in art house theaters watching those movies that you’ve never heard of and then never watch. Yeah, I’m that hipster asshole. My goal with this is to spread information out about these films, that way you can decide one of the following. “That actually sounds pretty cool! I want to see that now!” or “Man, I’m glad I decided to go see the new superhero movie!”. So without further ado, here is my article and review of Lore.
—
There are a lot of World War II films out there. There are a lot of Holocaust films out there. There is rarely ever anything guaranteed in cinema. It isn’t a guarantee that Star Wars will always succeed. It isn’t a guarantee that Sci-Fi will never win best picture at the Oscars. But if you want something that is guaranteed to happen in cinema, it’s that there will always be at least one World War II or Holocaust film coming out in a given year. I’m not saying this is bad, there are many critics and movie lovers out there that think we have made enough films on World War II and that we should move on. “We get it, the Holocaust happened and it was bad”. I’m not in that boat. If a filmmaker is passionate about a story taking place during World War II, they should go for it. It becomes a problem eventually because there are so many of them to compare to. This film has a twist to it, that I haven’t seen in a film before and is on a topic that I never considered before. This film should have worked much better than it did.
Lore is a technically Australian film, set in Germany right after the death of Adolf Hitler. Lore follows a group of Aryan Siblings as they move from place to place trying to survive in a war-torn and chaotic country. From the get-go, this film has an original idea to it. It’s rare that you see a film from the German’s perspective during World War II. It is almost non-existent for a film to show the common family in Germany at the time. And the film presents some great ideas! There is a scene where the eldest daughter named “Lore”, sees pictures of Jews who have been killed as well as pictures of the concentration camps. The film is really an exploration of this idea of the fact that these kids have been raised with Nazi Propaganda to fear and hate Jews. The interesting part of the film comes from the fact that you see this conflict of what is the truth when everything in your life has been a lie. On paper, this film is completely incredible. In execution, it doesn’t work as well.
The big issue I had with the film is the editing. The film is weirdly cut in a way that feels very jagged and choppy. It gives an uncomfortable feeling. As I write this I can tell that someone could argue that is the point. This is a holocaust film, after all, it shouldn’t be a comfortable watch. Fine. I can accept this point of view, it isn’t the one I have because the film doesn’t have any problems with tone. The tone is fairly consistent the entire time. The other big reason that I will say the editing is pretty bad is because the time lining of the film is god-awful. It seems like one second they are playing in a field and the next second they are building a fire in the dead of night. It feels this way because that is literally what happens at a point. There is no transition. There is no rhyme or reason for this. Just suddenly, boom, it’s nighttime. Better build a fire. Then a night will go by in what seems like thirty seconds. Two characters will be talking and it will be dead of night, then it’s morning by the time the conversation is halfway through. It rips you out of the experience and leaves you thinking “What just happened?”
On a more positive side, the film is shot absolutely beautifully. The color palette of the film is gorgeous and the cinematography is out of this world. The cinematography for the film is done by Adam Arkapaw, who if you aren’t aware of who this man is, I recommend looking into his work immediately because he is one of the best young cinematographers out there today. Recently you might have seen his work in Macbeth and The Light Between Oceans. Every film I have seen with cinematography by him, regardless of the subject matter or how good the rest of the film is, his cinematography is always top notch. Keep an eye out for him, because this film is no exception.
This is a film that I wanted to like much more than I actually did. This is another one of those films that I’ve known about for years and I’ve always heard good things. So I decided to check it out and there was a lot of good to it. There was also a lot of what I don’t want to call bad but poorly done filmmaking. I think the film is worth checking out if the subject matter interests you. If you are like the crowd I mentioned above and think that you’ve had enough World War II and Holocaust films, I get it. Don’t check this film out. But I think there is some good to this film that isn’t worth being ignored. Even if it isn’t even close to being perfect.
The Reel Nerds have multiple opinions about Split.
You know how when you’re wanting to go to the movie theater and you look up all the films that are showing and there are alway at least three that you’ve never heard of, let alone have any interest in seeing? Well, good news! I’ve seen those movies. I spend most of my theater experiences in art house theaters watching those movies that you’ve never heard of and then never watch. Yeah, I’m that hipster asshole. My goal with this is to spread information out about these films, that way you can decide one of the following. “That actually sounds pretty cool! I want to see that now!” or “Man, I’m glad I decided to go see the new superhero movie!”. So without further ado, here is my article and review of Dark Night.
—
Before starting the review, we should talk briefly about the bias in the room. I am from Denver originally. The Aurora shooting happened, and where I wasn’t present in the theater, I am close friends with multiple people who were. I have seen how the incident has changed and hurt people. The Reel Nerds have talked in depth about this event in the past. But it would not be fair to review this film without mentioning this before hand. This review will try to focus on the film, rather than the incident. And I will try to review it with as little bias as possible. But there are certain things I can not look past.
I don’t really know where to begin with this film. I have a lot of thoughts about this film. Most not being good. But before I jump into that, there are things about this film that aren’t bad that I should mention to the film’s credit. If you are unaware, Dark Night is a fictional film with heavy influence and essential re-creation of the Aurora Century 16 Theater Shooting. Dark Night follows various people as they go about their day before the incident. I think it is important to give credit where credit is due and we will start with the good in the film.
The cinematography is good. The color palette is fine, even if it is uninspired and at this point slowly becoming a cliché.
That’s the good. Now the bad.
I really don’t understand the film. It is so clearly a reenactment of the Century 16 Shooting, but at the same time, it is it’s own thing and even early on in the film they make a slight reference to the Century 16 Shooting as it’s own thing that also happened in this universe. Why not just go all out with Century 16? Why dance around the subject matter and make it a fictional story? And if you are going to dance around the subject matter, why would you ever think it’s a good idea to reference the actual tragedy? It would be like if halfway through watching Gus Van Sant’s Elephant a couple of the students say “Isn’t it crazy that the same thing happened at Columbine?” There is a reason why that line doesn’t appear in Elephant. And there is a reason why this line does exist in Dark Night.
A lot of critics have compared this film with Elephant significantly. Which makes sense. A lot of people have said this film has a very Harmony Korine feel to it, but I would say it has a much stronger Gus Van Sant feel to it. But the reason why everyone is comparing Dark Night with Elephant is because Dark Night is attempting to what Elephant did, the only problem is that it seems like the filmmakers of Dark Night don’t understand why Elephant works.
Another film that I want to draw a comparison to is Peter Berg’s recent film Patriots Day. The three films, Dark Night, Elephant, and Patriots Day all have the same theme of taking a recent tragedy and making it into a film. Off the bat, I will say that Elephant is, in my opinion, Gus Van Sant’s best film, not my favorite (Good Will Hunting), but his best film. Patriots Day is also a pretty good film. It’s a film I have problems with, but it is a well-made film. The thing that Elephant and Patriots Day do that make them good is how they handle the tragedy. We have three horrible tragedies that will forever be part of American History, The Columbine Massacre, The Boston Marathon Bombing, and Century 16. With a subject matter this dark and this serious, you have to walk a thin line. You have to realize how horrible these events are. Elephant follows multiple characters leading up to the massacre. But it never says anything judgmental about them. It just tells you who the characters are, whether they be good or bad. When the massacre happens, some of them die. It’s a bullet point. It’s a tragedy. But above all else, it never pretends to be anything other than human. Elephant doesn’t really have a message. The only message really being “This is humanity. This is a tragedy.” Elephant focuses on the people. It focuses on the humanity in the horror. You feel for everyone involved. In Elephant, it was clear that Gus Van Sant cared about the source material. It was clear that he knew how this hurt people. He knew his line, and he knew not to cross it. In Patriots Day, the reality of the situation is bent to fit the storyline. But it isn’t bent to fit the message. Though it isn’t really even close to being as good or as subtle as Elephant, Patriots Day is very much an ode to the victims and celebrating the overcoming of the horror. Like Elephant, it presents it. It doesn’t paint it, Berg might show it from a certain angle, but he doesn’t paint it to be anything else than what it already is. Dark Night takes the tragedy and paints over it to show you an agenda.
Dark Night isn’t about characters. If it was, the characters would be better developed and would mean something. It would be better if they meant nothing as that would give a message to the tragedy, but instead, they are just present they are mannequins that the filmmaker put in front of a camera. Dark Night isn’t about a story. If it was, there would be some kind of meaning behind all of this. Instead, we are given a plot line that has been used hundreds of times with close to no originality to it. Dark Night isn’t about anything that would make this film timeless. Dark Night is about giving you a message about Gun Violence, and Gun Control.
Bias Check. When it comes to gun control in the United States of America, I don’t have a strong opinion. I’ve fired guns in the past. I don’t hold a gun to me, and I probably never will. If the government takes away all guns, fine by me. If the government doesn’t take away all guns, it really doesn’t make much of a difference to me. I do think there are quite a few incidents where a mass shooting has happened because the wrong person had a gun. I do believe there should be some kind of restrictions in place to stop gun violence, but I really don’t know all of the facts to have a strong opinion where I know my stance. So keep that in mind as I proceed.
A message in a film is fine. A message that I disagree with is fine. I lean more liberal, but I can sit through a conservative based film and critique it on more than just the message. I like American Sniper for reasons beyond its message. Breitbart (I’m not starting anything, I’m just using it for now) has a list of the 25 best conservative films ever made, and I enjoy a lot of them. (I will also say that of those films I think Breitbart missed the message and satire in at least half of them but that isn’t important to the point). So if a filmmaker wants to make a film with a strong conservative message or a strong liberal message, that is perfectly fine. What bothers me is more of the handling of the source material.
You can’t really say the cause of the Aurora Shooting. You can say that the cause is gun violence, you can say the cause is mental health, you can say the cause is security, you can say the cause is media. The tragedy is complex and sinister. And it is partly why a film about it shouldn’t really be made this early. Unlike Elephant and Patriots Day it really isn’t over. There is still doubt. So when you have an agenda as strong as this one and you present it packaged with this real event, it isn’t healing. It isn’t presented with care. Dark Night has the attitude of “I told you so” throughout. This isn’t flowers on a grave, this is a bag of crap lit on fire on your front door.
Part of me agrees with what the film is trying to say. It’s ham-fisted, but I can go along with it. And I probably would have considered this a better film if one of two things happened. Either they make it it’s own thing, make a film about a mass shooting with the same characters and have the same message but don’t have it be so obviously Aurora. Or, go all out with Aurora. If you go hard with the tragedy it could work. I think it would be better if you do a documentary, the film tries to present itself like a documentary at points so it could work, but if you do a narrative film I can go along with that too. But you can’t do both. You can have your cake and eat it too. You need to decide what you are going to do, then you can do it. Exploiting a horrific event because you want to give your personal viewpoint isn’t acceptable. And don’t forget that word. This is a modern day Exploitation Film. This film would not exist if it wasn’t exploiting the tragedy as well as the audience.
There is the question of why now? Why make this film so soon after the incident? And I don’t know. There is never an answer given. This film doesn’t make the tragedy special. The only thing I can think is that the filmmaker chose to make this film because he knew exactly what he was doing. He wanted to stir a pot. And if that is what his intention was, he succeeded. Because I sit here today writing the longest review I’ve ever written. So congratulations Tim Sutton. You took one of the biggest tragedies in film loving, and you made a horror film. You took an event that still leaves people traumatized and struggles to move past, and you made it about you and your opinion about society. Congratulations Tim Sutton. You win.
If you want to support the victims of Aurora, here is the link to Aurora Rise, a non-profit trying to help the victims of the tragedy. Take the money you would have spent seeing this film and give it to them. It will mean more.
https://www.facebook.com/AuroraRiseColorado/
You know how when you’re wanting to go to the movie theater and you look up all the films that are showing and there are alway at least three that you’ve never heard of, let alone have any interest in seeing? Well, good news! I’ve seen those movies. I spend most of my theater experiences in art house theaters watching those movies that you’ve never heard of and then never watch. Yeah, I’m that hipster asshole. My goal with this is to spread information out about these films, that way you can decide one of the following. “That actually sounds pretty cool! I want to see that now!” or “Man, I’m glad I decided to go see the new superhero movie!”. So without further ado, here is my article and review of Amélie!
—
I needed a good palette cleanser after January’s reviews. Between Trash Humpers, Aaaaaaaah!, and Live by Night, I was pretty ready for a feel goody kind of film to enjoy. And that is exactly what I got with this film! Good job me! You choose the right film to watch this week! For once you didn’t choose a film that you watch knowing that no one would ever care about that film except for you! Your family loves you! This was one of the reasons why I watched this film, the other being that this has always been on my list of shame for films that I know I need to see at some point in my life. And then in my editing class this week, we had to cross films off of a list that we have seen to show our knowledge of what films we have already watched. And, this has happened to me multiple times, by the way, I was shamed for not seeing this film. So screw it! I write a weekly review series where I review Art House films, I’ll use that as an excuse to finally watch this film. You’re welcome me and the rest of the world!
Amélie is just delightful. I know I am probably the last person to ever recommend this film to you. I mean this is kind of the go-to film for anyone who wants to get into French Cinema but has never dipped their toes in it. But I won’t be the asshole this week and say “Oh it’s bullshit and overrated.” Not this week. Cough. Cough. La La Land. Cough.
Amélie follows a very innocent woman in France who grows up under wacky circumstances and now as an adult, she is dedicating to being a matchmaker and generally helping people around her. There is practically no conflict in this entire damn film. Which I am kind of okay with. It’s charming. Kind of in a Wes Anderson kind of way. The film, in general, has a very kid-like look to everything. Throughout the film, I wanted to call the film either surrealist or absurdist, but at the same time, the tone of the film really doesn’t fit either of those. A more accurate way to describe the film is that it is just silly. “Silly” is a word that I will rarely use to describe something because usually there are better words to describe art and using the word “Silly” make me sound like a child. But with a film with such a child-like wonder as much as this film, that is really the best way to describe the film.
The transitions in the film are silly. The writing in the film is silly. The acting in the film is silly. The film feels like it crawled right out of a child’s daydream. Which gives kind of a strange juxtaposition when there is kind of a large amount of sex in the film. Not a lot by any means. It isn’t like this film is a kid reimagined Blue is the Warmest Color or anything. But there is some loud and in your face kind of sex in this film. And when you jump from Audrey Tautou being adorable and smiling at the camera, to the moans of these two kind of unattractive (subjective) people, you get a strange seeing your parents naked kind of feeling. That is present, though it didn’t destroy the film for me by any means.
With everything that I have said thus far, you might be thinking “Then why isn’t this a five out of five-star film?” And the fact of the matter is that besides what I just mentioned, I really don’t have any issue with this film. It isn’t only well made but has a distinct style, something that will always give a film bonus points in my book. Besides the fact that it feels kind of vignette-like with the various tasks Amélie does throughout the film, I wouldn’t say I ever got bored. The film just never fully connected with me to absolutely adore the film.
But hold the phone.
This happens with me with really every feel good movie. I watch it and afterward I’m like “Yeah! I love that! That makes me happy! Go screw yourself Society that makes me sad!” but I am never like “You have to go see this film!” Because in all honesty, depressing and sad films I have an easier time recommending. Maybe that says something about me. It probably does say something about me. But we are moving past that. What always happens with feel good movies is that it takes me around three weeks after watching the film to realize how good it is. Then I rewatch it when I want a feel good movie and I bump it up almost always. This has happened with Cinderella, The Jungle Book, Chef, Sing Street. And it will probably happen with this film. But for now, it will remain where it is. It’s a good film and I’m glad I saw it. Now that we are in the cold and depressing season, check this film out if you want to feel all nice and fuzzy. Because there is a reason why even non-art house assholes still watch this French film from the early 2000s.