Art House Asshole

Art House Asshole : Incendies

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 Incendies.

—

Denis Villeneuve is something else. I decided to watch this film after seeing Villeneuve’s most recent release Arrival. I will talk more about that film on the podcast, but I watched this thinking “There is no way he can top Arrival”. I was wrong. I’ve seen all but two of Villeneuve’s films, those being his first two Maelström and Polytechnique. And this film, Incendies, is without a doubt the best I’ve seen thus far. The film is also his darkest film, which is saying something as he has made films on child murder, actors, and the cartel. Villeneuve is, in my opinion, the only “non-established” director who I believe will be known as one of the greatest directors of all time by his death.

Incendies was what many people consider Villeneuve’s breakout film, earning him a nomination for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film. It is also the last film Villeneuve made before transitioning into making English Language films. It is safe to say that this film is what got him Prisoners and launched his career into not the mainstream but just below it. And if you have seen his other films, you can see that this is, in fact, a Villeneuve film.

Incendies follows two twins, who after their mother’s death, attempt to find their secret brother so he can know of her death and have some kind of closure. The film follows the twins as the go to the Middle East and investigate who their mother was and who their brother might be. I believe that Villeneuve is one of the best suspense directors since Hitchcock. Villeneuve knows how to capture an audience and move them through a story. And he does so with ease and perfection in this film. The film is separated into chapters and bounces back and forth between the daughter investigating her mother’s past, and her mother living her past. And then there is a reveal toward the end of the film that completely blew my mind. I’m not sure if I would call it a plot twist, but between this and Arrival it is clear that if anyone can do twists it’s Villeneuve.

This film is almost perfect in my mind, but there are a few things that I can see someone else having problems with. The first is that this film is very emotional, the most of all of Villeneuve’s work. It is extremely depressing throughout and I can see someone calling the film “Misery Porn”. Personally, that doesn’t bother me. The film never went into an area where I thought the horribleness wasn’t earned or helped the story. But if you can’t handle some heavy subject matters like torture, rape, and death of children, then maybe this film isn’t for you. The second problem I had with this film is less of a problem and more of a double-edged sword. The actress who plays the daughter and the actress who plays the young mother, look incredibly similar. To the point where when it would switch between the two I would get confused and it would take me a bit to adjust and realize that we were in a different time period. Eventually, I adjusted and was able to hear the beats the signified that this was a different time period, but there was an adjustment period that was a bit confusing in the first part of the film. But at the same time, though, I would much rather the actresses who play mother and daughter look similar than the opposite so like I said, it’s a double-edged sword.

If you like Villeneuve’s other work, I strongly recommend you check this one out. It is clear that this was something that he was given almost creative control over with the darkness, something I don’t think we will ever see again from him if he continues to work in American Film. This isn’t necessarily bad, but it is something different we might not get another chance to see. So check it out because it is incredible.

Also as a big overall suggestion, if you haven’t already, start exploring Canadian Cinema. Between Villeneuve, Xavier Dolan, Jean-Marc Vallée, and much more, Quebec is producing some of the best film directors out there today. And it is hard to go wrong with a lot of them.

Art House Asshole : Zero Motivation

—

I feel like there is a time for everyone where nothing seems to make sense. Not like a time in your life. But like “Thursday” for example. That time for me is the middle week of November. It not right after Halloween and me still living in that spooky land. It isn’t the end of November and my birthday. It’s smack dab in the middle of the month that most people don’t give a crap about. It is also the week where I can’t seem to get anything done. I just want to sleep. So that’s why I chose this film for this week’s Art House Asshole. Because I have Zero Motivation for this article. And yes this first paragraph is just one big stupid pun.

Zero Motivation is an Israeli workplace/military comedy. This is the first Israeli film that I have done as part of this series and boy could I have not chosen a more Israeli film for the first. Zero Motivation follows a group of girls serving their mandatory service with the IDF. Before you do anything with this film, you need to realize that this film is based on a solely Israeli conflict. In America and most of the rest of the world, we don’t have a mandatory service that we have to serve. So unless you are Israeli, you probably won’t have the greatest time with this film. This film is very good, however, despite not being as relatable as you might imagine.

Like I said in my Toni Erdmann review, foreign comedy is a very difficult type of film to review. A lot of comedy comes down to timing, something that is lost if you are reading subtitles. The being said this film is funny. The best way I can describe the film is that it feels like Orange is the New Black meets Office Space. The Orange is the New Black might just be my sexist mind seeing that all of the main characters are women, but whatever you get what I mean. It’s about a bunch of girls in a workplace environment that none of them want to be in. It has a very Kafka-esque feel to it, something that a line in the film makes me believe was very much on purpose. The comedy is witty and smart. And where there are some jokes that don’t land as much, the second act gag is somewhat or a chore to get through, it is a very well written comedy.

The acting in the film is great for a bunch of fairly undiscovered or “new” talent. Everyone did their job well and I didn’t think anyone did a bad job. The only issue from the acting standpoint is that one of the main characters (I’m not sure if she is supposed to be the main character or one of the main characters) is just unlikable in my mind. I understand that her circumstance makes her bitter toward the world and not give a crap in general, but at the end of the day I was just annoyed and was displeased when she did some of the things she did. I wanted to shout to her “Please care about this for once!” throughout the film. And some of the characters do this, they mention that while she is messing around others are dying. The film, where it is silly, does do everything with a grain of salt. It doesn’t let you forget that while the situation that the characters are living is goofy and funny, there is the overall conflict and literal war that is present the whole time. It is done so in a way that I haven’t seen done in a comedy before. And I give the film a lot of props for that.

My biggest and at this time only issue with the film is the second act. There is a point in the film where one of the main characters leaves for one reason (I won’t say why because it is one of the best gags in the film). But when she leaves, the second act is completely void of that character. And the film grinds to the pace of a snail. There is one gag that is a little too goofy for the film and is out of character. I usually write these reviews on Monday and check them throughout the week before they go up on Friday. I’m writing this Thursday night before it goes up tomorrow because this second act was so hard to get through that I almost didn’t finish the film. Which is a shame because the third act is so good that it makes up for the strange and pointless second act. I understand why the second act exists. It needed to show a sense of time passing for the third act to work and make sense. But it really brings the film down. A lot.

Overall this is one of the better foreign language comedies I’ve seen in a long time, probably since Toni Erdmann. I’ve been meaning to watch more Middle East films. If you aren’t aware, the Middle East is currently going through their own huge film movement, rivaling the French New Wave and far bigger than the Czech Yellow Wave. And if you want to start exploring that movement, this is a great place to start for Israeli cinema. So check it out if you can, because I don’t think you’ll regret it.

Art House Asshole : High-Rise

—

It’s standard irony that the first two reviews after Halloween have both been bizarre workaround horror films. Much like how The Neon Demon is a workaround vampire films, Ben Wheatley’s High-Rise is a work around haunted house film. It has all of the traits of a haunted house film, along with other traits that make it more Art House like and “smart”. The film is also a mess and convoluted. But we’ll get into that a bit later.

Also similar to The Neon Demon, I wouldn’t call myself a fan of the director. I haven’t seen enough of Wheatley’s filmography to have a big opinion on him, to be fair. But the film that I did see, A Field in England, I was not a fan of. So I went in with somewhat low expectations. And I came out with a conflicted opinion of a film I think I like. But I might not like it. I’m kind of in the middle on this film.

From watching the trailers and other work of Wheatley, I can tell that he absolutely loves the 70s. Which is fine. I also love the 70s. It is probably my favorite decade. But Wheatley is pretty obsessed. The film never gives a date for when the film takes place, but you would be understood if you assumed it took place in the 70s. This has been the longest transition for any article ever to get to the point that the set design and the costume design is the best part of this film. The design of the building is completely gorgeous. Which is understandable as it is the main point of the film.

High-Rise follows a doctor, played by Tom Hiddleston, who moves into the new luxury apartment high rise. A building designed so that you would never have to leave. A gym on one floor and a grocery on another. The higher you are in the building, the more expensive your apartment will be. If you couldn’t figure it out, the main point of this film is class warfare. Literally warfare. This film gets extremely violent.

Some have compared this film to Snowpiercer. Personally, I liked this much more than I liked Snowpiercer. And a lot of that has to do with the costume and set design. These two categories go all out on this film. All of the sets are gorgeous and all of the costumes are gorgeous. But where there is beauty, there is also a dark linger to it. One that isn’t clear but is present. Something you can feel but can’t see. Until you can. And it becomes strange and extremely obvious.

Also similar to The Neon Demon, this film changes around halfway through. There is a turning point in this film where it becomes more mystical. Where The Neon Demon turns into a vampire film. Where this film turns into a haunted house film. It’s when this film gets violent and “exciting”, but honestly, it’s where the film falls in my mind. This film goes one to one million in a matter of seconds. And you are probably thinking that it just starts with a bang, but it doesn’t. It isn’t a sudden snap change, but a fade change that happens far too quickly. If that makes sense. In a snap change, like The Neon Demon, you go “Oh! This is different! But this is what we are doing now”. But in a rapid fade film like this you end up thinking “How did this happen? Why is everyone panicking? Why are we all bleeding all of the sudden?” This feels like an issue of both pace and writing. I knew what caused this to happen, but I didn’t know why everyone was reacting this way to it. It felt like the second act started with the characters feeling like they should in the third act but were playing catch-up the whole time. I worry that this isn’t clear enough, but I can’t figure out how to describe this any better.

The class warfare angle works, but will only work if you let it. This film is kind of absurd. There is no way this would happen and if you need realism in your films I wouldn’t recommend this one. But I had a fun time with this film because I choose not to try to poke holes in it. The film is a complete mess, with nothing making sense and nothing being real. But I am positive that was on purpose. You don’t make this thinking it is clean and proper. You don’t accidentally make this. Wheatley made this film with the intent of it being complete bonkers and being a crazy meltdown of a film. So you might not like that it doesn’t make sense or that it is non-sensical but that is completely the point. He did exactly what he wanted to do.

I really wanted to give this film four and a half stars. I really did. But the sudden fade in the film completely killed the film for me and the second half of the film kept dragging on me. I do really like this film. There is a lot of like about it, but there are also so many road bumps that it is hard to say it’s a smooth ride. I got too distracted by these other angles that I couldn’t focus on the larger picture, that is if there ever really was one.

Art House Asshole : The Neon Demon

—

I understand if you are tired of this film. The Reel Nerds did an entire episode on this film, straight up doing a shot for shot breakdown. But I want to do a lot of more accessible more films after the month of films that aren’t going to come out for another couple months. So we are doing this film for that reason and because a couple different people have asked/requested me to give my opinion on this film. So yeah, that’s the prequel to why I’m doing a review on this film this week.

So what did the asshole of the group think if this film? I thought it was okay. I’m wouldn’t call myself a fan of Refn. But I wouldn’t say I dislike his films either. I liked Drive and Bronson, if you haven’t see Bronson do yourself a favor and go watch Bronson, but disliked Only God Forgives. If someone was to ask me how I would rank his filmography, I would say it goes Bronson> The Neon Demon> Drive> Only God Forgives. Now that I have said this you are probably looking back up at my star rating and thinking “Hey! What’s up with that?” Well, we’ll get into it. But I think this film is really good at three-fourths of what it wants to do. Which is better than most films, but that last quarter bugged me more than I would have liked it.

First of all, this film is flat out gorgeous. The cinematographer is Natasha Braier and is one talented lady. She has also worked on The Rover and XXY. Both of which being very well shot films, but with this film, it is something different. I don’t know if Refn just lets her down whatever she wanted or if it was a collaborative effort. Where Refn’s other films are well shot, this film is on another level. And this is ten times better shot than Braier’s other work. So it’s hard to tell exactly who is responsible. Either way, this film is THE BEST shot film I’ve seen all year. I’m not exaggerating that you can pause the film at any point and that shot will be good enough to be a wallpaper. I don’t think anyone would argue that the cinematography is the film’s strongest point, but it should be noted that no one is pulling your leg or over hyping this film. This is the best shot film of the year and I would be surprised if that changes.

Let’s now talk about the acting. I would say that all of the supporting actors, besides Jena Malone, are good in the film. I was never taken out of the film because of the acting and in some scenes, like the scene where the photographer asks the other guy if this one girl is beautiful, the acting is pretty great. But there are some bad spots in the acting. It might just be me, but I could not stand Jena Malone in this film. Every line was so overacted. Every facial expression was overacted. I would say that Elle Fanning did this too, but to a much lesser extent. Fanning did it every once and a while but Malone did it with every line. She performed, ironically, like she was in a Lynch film. Like it’s dreamlike or surrealist, but that works in Lynch films because everyone is doing that and that is the point. Malone is just doing her own thing the entire time and I hated every moment of it.

The writing is fine. It was strange and definitely not why you are going to watch the film. But I’ll talk about it because I’m conflicted about it. There are certain lines in the film that are really good. Again I reference the scene about who is beautiful and why that matters. But there are a lot of lines that are extremely scripted. And I will say that I’m not against films feeling like their scripted. Aaron Sorkin is one of my favorite writers and every time I watch one of his films I think “Wow! That’s a great line!” not “Wow! This changes the story!” By definition, it takes me out of the film. But with Sorkin it works, it all flows together. With this film, you get one great line that works really well on paper by itself, but when you sandwich it together with two okay lines, it just ends up feeling forced. I felt that way through a couple different scenes in the film. Not enough for me to dislike the film, but I thought I would mention it.

I will say there is a moment in the film that was a turning point from me mostly liking the film to mostly thinking it is alright. It’s pretty much exactly halfway through the film, and it’s when you start to dislike Elle Fanning’s character. This is also when the film decides to really get weird. This is when the film would fall under “pretentious” in some people’s minds. One critic said they loved the cinematography but it’s when it gets into poor gore and special effects that turned them off. I’m not one-hundred percent on board with this critic but I think I can agree with it to an extent. Everything in the film is so good that when you get to the poor special effects, it just ripped me out of the experience. Maybe I’m being too picky and some people wouldn’t see the effects, but it brought me out and I thought I would mention it.

The film ends up being kind of silly in a way, but only after that point. That is when the film goes from being an artistic satire on the fashion industry, to being a vampire film. Which is fine, but the change is so sudden that right as I got comfortable in this world, it pushed me into a new one.

So yeah, I think it’s okay. It’s better than what some people are saying. That’s for sure. I don’t like nearly as much as James does, but I can see why he would like this film. It’s not for everyone but there is an audience for it. I’m just halfway into that audience.

Art House Asshole – I, Daniel Blake

—

Really? This won the Palme d’Or at Cannes this year? This film? Not American Honey, Toni Erdmann, or even Hell or Highwater? This film was declared the best film at Cannes, the most prestigious film festival of the year. I mean, the film isn’t bad. But it all of the films I just listed are better films. And this isn’t even a matter of artistic choice and preference. Last year Dheepan won the Palme at Cannes, but I personally thought Youth was the best film of the year. Both were fantastic films, they both sit in my top ten of 2015. I personally liked the artistic choices in Youth better than Dheepan, but I can see why some would like Dheepan more. I, Daniel Blake is just an inferiorly made film. There are basic filmmaking issues in the film that I can look past but these are elements that are needed in a good film, especially the winner of the Palme d’Or.

I, Daniel Blake is a film directed by Ken Loach at the prime age of 80 years old. I will admit that I have not seen any other films by Ken Loach, so if I complain about something in this that sounds like his style then I apologize but I will say that his style is poor here. The film follows Daniel Blake, played by Dave Johns, an old widowed man who is attempting to find any kind of income while he heals from a heart attack that leaves him without work. Daniel Blake soon befriends a mother of two who is dealing with her own financial struggles, played by Hayley Squires. The film follows them on their endeavors and their dissatisfaction with the house tax and the Employment and Support Allowance in the UK.

The film ends up being “Let’s Watch Daniel Blake Get Annoyed With The ESA And Build Things For This Unfortunate Family: The Movie”. You get to see him talk to people in person who don’t help him! You get to see him try to work a computer! You get to see him wait while his call is on hold! Were you disappointed in how loud and fast American Honey was? Then this film is just for you! I say that as a joke, but the target audience for this film and American Honey are complete opposites of each other.

I understand if you say that, “Oh but this film is accurate to the reality of the ESA”! I’m sure it is, but you have to do something to win me over to want to watch it unfold. The acting in the film is okay but sometimes slips into flat out bad. Dave Johns and Hayley Squires, where I haven’t seen them in anything else, do an okay job but the writing is so bland and sometimes annoying that it is hard for me to relate to the characters. The suspension of disbelief never fully reached it’s potential for me to care.

One of the biggest issues I had in the film is that it makes everyone who works with the ESA to be a mustache twirling villain. They all hate everyone without showing any other sign of emotion or understanding. Even the one who feels bad for Daniel Blake is later brought in by her boss and is yelled at for being nice. You might think “That’s how it’s supposed to be, that’s realistic”. Except it’s not. It’s hard to describe if you haven’t seen the film, but it is comical how much these people talk with an attitude of not understanding or caring. It just doesn’t make sense and rips me out of the film.

The film has a very uninspired look to it as well. It feels very much like there was no love or emotion put into the film. As the film ended I realized that this is nothing more than a glorified Lifetime Movie. Every shot, I’ve seen before. Every scene, I’ve seen before. There is almost nothing original about this film. There are a total of two scenes that I genuinely enjoyed. The first being a scene in a food bank and the second being the scene where the film gets it’s title from. But those two scenes don’t warrant the film being called fantastic in my mind. There are too many other clichés for me to truly enjoy it.

Like I said before, this film feels like a Lifetime Movie. If you see it on television, I imagine you would like it a fair amount. But when I went in think it would be in my best of the year list, I was highly disappointed. Maybe the film needs a re-watch in the future. Maybe I should have lowered my expectations. But nothing hit it home for me. I think that people should know about the problems the film is trying to express, concerning the ESA and how hard it is for lower class citizens of the UK. But I, Daniel Blake fails in making me care for the subjects in the film. This is something that would have worked much better if it was a documentary and not a fictional story.

Art House Asshole : 20th Century Women

—

This film is difficult for me to review. Primarily because I don’t know if this film is poorly made and manipulative at the end, or if it’s a finely made film that ends really well. We’ll get into it, but I’m not sure how exactly the film is good.

20th Century Women is directed by Mike Mills from Beginners and Thumbsucker fame. I was able to attend the premiere of the film and close after I saw many reviews claiming this was the best film Mills has made. I disagree with this statement. I can understand if you think 20th Century Women is better than Thumbsucker, I personally like Thumbsucker for more personal and nostalgia based reasons. But I think it is in no way better than Beginners, which to date is Mike Mills most personal film. I think people are mistaking “best” with “most mainstream”. This film will be nominated for Academy Awards and will make a big splash at the end of the year. But I think it is the most average and plain film Mike Mills has made.

20th Century Women follows a house in Santa Barbara in the late 1970s. The house is owned by a middle-aged mom, played by Annette Bening, and her son, played by Lucas Jade Zumann. In the home, Bening’s character rents to two individuals played by Greta Gerwig and Billy Crudup. All while this is happening, Zumann’s character’s friend but isn’t his girlfriend, played by Elle Fanning. Bening’s character feels like she needs help raising and teaching her son about the world, so she asks Fanning and Gerwig’s character to help teach him things. Then wacky adventures ensue. This is one of those films where there isn’t really a set plot, but instead you just watch these characters live and see what makes them tick.

This is the first problem with the film. Every scene feels like a great idea that isn’t executed well. For example, there is a scene where Fanning is teaching Zumann how to smoke and walk “cool”. This sounds like it could be interesting, having a female perspective on what a cool guy is and how to act like one. The problem is that the dialogue is often hit or miss. You will have this great idea for a scene but then have it just not fully take advantage of what it’s given. I don’t want to spoil a lot of the scenes but there is so much to play with in this time period and these proposed actions that it feels like it’s wasted on this boring script.

That being said, the acting is incredible in this film, for the most part. The three female leads in the film are all amazing. Greta Gerwig gives what I consider her best performance I have seen. I think it will be a travesty if she isn’t even considered for Best Supporting Actress. Elle Fanning is proving herself to be a fantastic actress, in the same league if not higher than her sister. And that’s not even talking about Annette Bening, who should be the frontrunner for Best Actress for the Academy Award this year. Despite all of the mediocre at worst writing the film has, these three actresses completely knock it out of the park, proving that a great performer can elevate a bad script.

On the flip side of things, however, the male lead played by Lucas Jade Zumann often is the weakest link to every scene. Which is unfortunate because he is in every scene. I’m not saying the Zumann is bad, or that he doesn’t have a future as a great actor. I think he has a lot of potential. The only problem is that he is acting in an Academy Award potential film, where all three of the female performers he acting with are grabbing for the gold. So what ends up happening is that the three female performers end up acting circles around him. It’s unfortunate but it took me out of the film multiple time due to his performance.

Another issue is that every character in this film feels like a character. That sounds dumb and doesn’t make any sense. I know, but let me explain. When I think about everyone and everything in this film, I picture the game of Clue in my head. Greta Gerwig isn’t playing a real person from the 70s but is playing what someone thinks someone would have been like in the 70s. The characters are fleshed out enough for me to feel like I care about them, but not fleshed out enough for them to feel real. It feels very calculated and without style in a lot of ways.

That being said there are certain flourishes that you can tell that Mike Mills put in that work really well. In some shots there is a glitchy and television-y type color effect that looks really cool and certain scenes are sped up for certain effects. There is no rhyme or reason to why these things pop up, but it is nice to have them come through. But with these stylistic parts, there are also other “flourishes” that don’t work. Throughout the film other pieces of art, whether it be written text or other films or public speeches, are spliced in to give a sense of the time and the people. I’m assuming this is to help move the story along as well as give a sense of time and context. But it always feels slightly out of place. Certain things work, such as the Carter speech. But most of it just feels out of place and in a way kind of lazy.

All of the previous negative things would lead you to think that I hated and or disliked this film. I don’t. The writing is really the only thing that is bad in the film. It’s shot well, the acting is great for the most part. It is very competent. It just lacks the fun flair that I’ve come to love from Mike Mills. It didn’t hit me as hard as Beginners and didn’t stick with me like it did with Thumbsucker. But when the last scene played, I don’t know what happened. I don’t know if it was emotionally manipulative. I don’t know if all of the puzzle pieces given from previous scenes just came together perfectly. But when the last scene happened, I was bawling. I can’t explain it because previously I never thought it was fantastic or anything. But it stuck a cord with me at the end.

My star rating of the film might go down in the future. But I’m sticking with it at four stars right now. I recommend the film if you love Academy Award films because this film was tailored to that crowd. It is going to be a big deal when it comes out, but don’t get your hopes too high. It’s good. Even if it is very basic.

Art House Asshole : Toni Erdmann

—

Foreign comedy films are the hardest genre to enjoy in my opinion. It has nothing to do with it being a comedy. I know that this is probably the first comedy I have reviewed as part of this series, but know that I do enjoy comedies. I also very much enjoy foreign films, otherwise, this series would be kind of redundant. The problem is that what makes comedy great isn’t the jokes itself, but the timing. You can’t get hit by a performers punchline if you’re reading what the performer is going to say. It ruins the timing almost always. That is what makes this films so baffling. This film is in three different languages throughout, and the timing is perfect. The film is so well crafted, not only in comedy timing but in the bare basics of pacing, that it is a pleasure to watch.

Toni Erdmann, directed by Maren Ade, was the frontrunner to win this year’s Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Or at least is was the frontrunner until it was completely shut out. I’m seeing what won the Palme later this month so we’ll see if they made the right decision. When the presenter of the film festival introduced the film, she said that it was hard to describe. She stated that the film is about a father and daughter relationship, but with more than you would think. She said that the film is about sexism in the workplace, but in a different way than you would imagine. The film does fall under that rule. But at the end of the day, I think that those two aspects aren’t what makes this film great. This film is about humanity. The film gives its optimistic view as to how you should live your life. And that’s what makes this film so special.

Toni Erdmann follows an aged and divorced father who decides to spontaneously visit his grown and business successful daughter without warning. This sounds like a simple enough film with a simple enough idea. Sounds like a real fun hour and a half long film. Toni Erdmann is almost three hours long. Toni Erdmann has no right to be the same length as The Godfather. But Toni Erdmann wears its length better than almost every other film made this year. For how long this film is, the pacing is done so wonderfully that I never wanted the film to be over. It never felt like we were doing something that didn’t need to be there. It felt natural and fun and happy. I wasn’t waiting for the film to end, but when it did end, I embraced it and knew that I didn’t need anything else. The presenter said that this film is the fastest three-hour long film you will see this year. And she is damn right.

Part of what makes the film so great is a combination of both the lead performers, neither of which I have seen before but I am on the move to change that real quick. The male lead, played by Peter Simonischek, is so lovable and goofy while also showing real pain in some scenes. This alone makes him one of the best characters in a film this year. His big motive in life is to find humor and fun in the mundane and everyday life. The exact opposite of what his daughter, played by Sandra Hüller, believes. The daughter characters opposition of the lifestyle her father lives, you would think would give the biggest laughs. Surprisingly, to me at least, this is where most of the heart comes from. A majority of the film is the father realizing that his daughter is successful but unhappy. So what results is him doing his best to give his daughter happiness through jokes and pranks. But once you realize this, the jokes are outweighed by the knowledge of how unhappy his daughter really is, and how no matter what he does to cheer her up, he ends up just getting in the way. The film does a fantastic job of having you relate to both of the characters in ways that you never hate the other one, but you have a real family sense between the two.

A majority of the film is establishing the characters. This includes the two leads, but also includes almost every other character in the film. There is a party scene toward the end of the film, that is honestly the funniest scene I may have seen all year. Once the scene ended I thought, “This would be a good scene to show people if they didn’t want to sit through the entire film”. But what I realized after the film was over was that the scene completely fails if you don’t know who these characters are. Each character in the scene does something that calls back to a character development moment from earlier in the film. The party scene takes everything you learned about the characters from the film and gives you the biggest payoff of any film I’ve seen this year. It would have been a great place to end the film, but the film goes one step further and ends with a scene that makes you love the film even more so. I will say that this is the first film I’ve seen this year that has made me cry, and it was one of the most beautiful moments I’ve seen in a film all year.

We’re getting to the point of the year where, if I’m lucky, I’ll be saying “This is the best film I’ve seen all year” for multiple films. This is the best film I’ve seen all year. It’s beautiful. It’s hilarious. It’s heartwarming. It’s a reminder that life isn’t as horrible as we often make it out to be. There is one line in the film that hit me harder than I would have imagined, and I think I’m going to end this review with it. Because if you sit through this film, which I highly recommend, I think you will feel something you may not have felt in a long time, at least that’s how it was for me. Please, don’t loose your sense of humor.

Art House Asshole : American Honey

—

God damn I needed this. By this time last year, I had a good amount of truly great films from the year that I could say belong in my top ten. Right now I only have two films there, but this is one of them. After all of the bad art house and indie films (White Girl, Anti-Viral) it is so good to have not only a great film but an artistic experience. I honestly struggle to start this review because I have not idea where to begin.

American Honey, directed by Andrea Arnold from Fishtank fame, is both beautiful and garbage at the same time. American Honey follows a young woman, played by newcomer Sasha Lane, who joins a group of misfits, lead by Shia LaBeouf and Riley Keough, to sell magazines across the country for easy cash. Regardless of how you feel about this film, it is important to understand that this film is real. This is one of the most brutal views of millennial culture I’ve seen in a long time, but it is also one of the most realistic views. These people are very much alive and whether you like it or not, these people are the majority of millennials. You might not like these characters. You might be disgusted by the events in this film and hate every word that comes out of the mouths of these characters. But that is kind of the point.

If you are in the boat that hates Shia LaBeouf, please see this film. It might not help your hatred. But this is the best performance I have seen him give probably ever. LaBeouf is a strange creature who went from being an action star to being an art house actor. It almost never happens, in fact, I can’t think of another moment where this has happened, but I respect LaBeouf for doing it. He does exactly what he wants whenever he wants. And oh my god he is fantastic in this film. You never know if you should trust him or if he is full of crap or if he is just a straight up idiot. He performs this character so well that he drags the audience through so much that you never want to see him but you can’t look away.

You can say that about a majority of this film. American Honey is like a dumpster fire, a beautiful and majestic dumpster fire. You either don’t care if it burns to the ground or you want to see it burn. Regardless, you can’t take your eyes off of it. There is a mesmerizing factor to the film, it can be disgusting but you can’t look away. The one thing I will say is that I feel that the older you are the more you will dislike the film. This film is a product of its time, and if you aren’t part of the millennial generation this might not work for you in any shape or form. Halfway through watching this film I realized that there is probably an age where if you are older than that age, you will not like this film. I will guess that age is 32.

Another thing worth mentioning is the aspect ratio of the film. I will say that whenever a film chooses to change their aspect ratio from the standard, I will immediately start to like the film more. I don’t know what it is about it, but I love it. The film is presented in 1.37 aspect ratio which makes it look a little bigger than a perfect cube. The film takes advantage of this by having the camera often be very close to the actors and very much in the action. It reminded me a lot of the cinematography in Son of Saul if that helps you figure it out. Every shot in this film is beautiful. The shots actually remind me of Instagram photos surprisingly. I’m not sure if that was on purpose to fit the theme of millennial culture, but if it is props to the film.

The only real complaint I have about the film is that it feels very long. There were a couple moments at the end where I was waiting for the film to wrap up. There were three moments that I thought, this is probably the last scene. I’m not considering this a huge issue because afterward, I started thinking about what wasn’t necessary to the film and I feel like everything in the film was necessary, the script being much tighter than I imagined it would have been. So I think the real complaint here comes down to the pacing of the film.

Recommending this film is tricky. This film is for a very specific audience. If you are in your twenties watch it and I think you will enjoy it a lot, you will be surprised at how oddly relatable the film is. If you are in your thirties I don’t imagine you will like the story or the characters, you might just find it annoying if you don’t just focus on the cinematography and other beautiful elements of the film. If you are in your forties or higher, you will hate this film and might even see it as a straight up horror film. If you have college age kids, do not watch this film. I’m pretty sure my mom is going to call me and have a serious conversation with me after watching this film.

Art House Asshole : Goat

—

Between this film and White Girl, it has been made clear to me that being a young college age person is where you are probably going to die. Which isn’t a pleasant thought for me as I am a young college age person. So if I die in the next four years or whatever, know it’s not because of whatever the police are saying. It’s because I’m a young college age guy.

I should start this review by stating my opinion on the subject matter. If you are unaware, Goat is a psychological drama about fraternities. Before I say anything else about this film, know that I am very anti-greek life. I think that the greek system should be abolished and that it does close to no good for everyone involved. That being said, I didn’t feel like this film was as extremely anti-greek life like I thought it would. The film at the end of the day wasn’t against greek life, but the people that are drawn to greek life.

Goat, directed by Andrew Neel of King Kelly fame, follows a young college age guy who decides to join his brother’s fraternity after a traumatic experience. I would say more, but I don’t think there is much else to say. From that one line, you can probably guess exactly where this film is going. Hell Week happens and just like you would imagine, things don’t go well. Then things happen because of Hell Week, something that also shouldn’t be a surprise. None of this should be surprising because this film follows the exact structure as every other frat-house drama ever made.

The film is written by David Gordon Green. David Gordon Green I think writes some fantastic indie films. If you haven’t yet already, go watch George Washington and Prince Avalanche. Both of those films are written by David Gordon Green and are some of the best indie filmmaking I’ve seen, and not in the weird pretentious way either. David Gordon Green also made Pineapple Express and Your Highness but we are going to conveniently forget those films for the time being. This is why I am somewhat surprised at how bland this film is written. Like I said earlier, if you have ever seen any drama about frat-life then you’ve seen all of the beats of this film. Specifically, I point to 2014’s The Riot Club. The Riot Club is a god-awful film based on a fantastic play. I will say right now that I liked this film a lot more than I liked The Riot Club. But halfway through this film I actually looked up to see if this film was based on the same play because you could argue that this film is straight up plagiarism. This film hits the exact same beats at the exact same moments. The original part of this film is the traumatic event at the beginning of the film, but that really doesn’t play into the large frat story as much as you think it would. I was expecting, and hoping, that something would come from that part to make this film unique but nothing really ever happened.

The rest of the film is equally as bland. The film doesn’t break any real ground. There is no real component of this film that I can say is great. Everything in this film is done so averagely that I feel like I will forget this film ever happened by this time next week. The acting is better than I was expecting, especially from Nick Jonas. But no one has a real stand out performance. The lead, who I would also like to point out was in The Riot Club (I know this is coming out of nowhere but I just looked him up and I think it’s hilariously ironic that he was in both films), was also good. James Franco was touted as the second billed person but he has two minutes of screen time literally. I honestly don’t know why he is in the film besides one point the film is making that has no purpose to the greater story. The cinematography is bland. The direction is bland. It feels like everyone one set knows what they’re doing, but no one really cares.

Going back to one of my earlier points, the film isn’t anti-frat. I feel like the filmmaker thinks that frat houses can be really good. Which I agree with. On paper, fraternities can be a great way to make connections, live with your friends, do good, and do all of these great things that can help your future. The problem is that lifestyle attracts Frat Bros. And that is what I think the director is saying. The film hints, not very subtly, that the hazing and Hell Week that the main character is going through mirrors his traumatic experience at the beginning of the film. You see the brutality the pledges have to go through. Now that I’m thinking about it, there was one thought provoking scene between the leader of the frat and Nick Jonas’s character where the discussion is based on “are we going too far?”. That scene is very brief and goes by quickly. I might be looking too far into it but I do think this is the best scene in the film. How I put the scene together was that it was showing why the frat gets progressively more aggressive every year. Linking Hell Week as a revenge that everyone goes through but everyone then wants closure on as well. I might be looking too close to the film but that is what I was seeing.

Goat does to masculinity what King Kelly did to femininity. I haven’t seen King Kelly in a couple years, but I think that the two would make an interesting double feature. I don’t think I recommend this film. I think that if you accidentally watch it then you won’t be mad, but I can’t see anyone truly loving this film. I think there are better Frat House Dramas, but there are a lot worse you could do as well.

Art House Asshole : Blue is the Warmest Color

—

I’ll be frank at the start of this review. Abdellatif Kechiche’s Blue is the Warmest Color is one of my favorite films of all time. If you listen to the podcast enough with me on it, I have brought this film up at least twice. I know some disagree with me on this, if you listen to Filmsplosion 2015 you can hear Steve of Alamo Denver and I talk about what is the greatest LGBT film of all time, but I do think this is the greatest LGBT film of all time. We can get into my rebuttal for the complaints people have about this film, but I will always absolutely adore this film from the bottom of my heart.

Sometimes I will go one step further than saying this is the greatest LGBT Film of all time and occasionally will say this is one of the greatest love stories of all time as well. Re-watching this film for this review reminded me how heartwarming and heartbreaking this film can be, and I do think this film affects me more than almost any other romance film I’ve seen almost ever. And I feel the reason for this being the fact that the film feels extremely real.

The film has a very realistic and personal view of the two characters lives. None of the cinematography is “beautiful” in the traditional sense. None of the shots look like they are set up, except for a few which we will get into later, they all have a very hand-held feel to them. With this setup, it doesn’t feel like you are watching a movie, but are actually with these characters. You feel less like you are watching the story play out, but are part of the story with them.

Along with the cinematography, the writing and the acting are very natural as well. Both the leads played by Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux, give the performances of their careers in this film. I understand that Adèle Exarchophoulous is only twenty-two as of writing this and has a very big career ahead of her, but I think it will be very difficult for her to ever top this performance. Both characters work so well with each other that it makes everything that happens in the film so much better and harder when the tones change. Both feel so natural. When the characters smile you see the smile in their eyes, not their mouths. When the characters are hurt you can see it in their eyes. If you are ever wanting to critique acting, watch the eyes. Because if you can’t see it in their eyes they aren’t feeling anything. And everything in this film is told through the eyes.

When I was watching the film this week, I was accompanied by a few friends who had also seen the film before. One of the complaints that one of my friends had was that there are so many eating scenes in the film and every character eats extremely sloppily. I will admit, that I did not notice this before. So when I watched the film, this time, I did notice that yes, there are a lot of eating scenes. For the first hour or so I was trying to figure out what the eating scenes meant, and it wasn’t until the next day that I realized that this is going into the natural aspect of the film. Kechiche was going for a very naturalistic view of love, relationships, and humanity. This is the same reason that there are many shots of Adèle Exarchopoulos sleeping, where the actress didn’t realize she was being filmed. Along with this feeling, you have the eating scenes. Yes, there are a lot of eating scenes. But people eat a lot. And what my friend was critiquing about everyone eating sloppily, I can say that is how people eat. We eat sloppily sometimes. This film doesn’t sugar coat life. It shows the dirty to everything. Including sex.

Now we get into what this film is, unfortunately, known for. The biggest complaint that I have heard about this film is that the sex scenes in the film are extremely long and in some people’s minds, unnecessary. Yes, the sex scenes are very graphic and go on for a long time, to the point where I think that one of the sex scenes is ten minutes long. I defend this saying that it goes with the natural view the film has. I view these scenes as somewhat uncomfortable and too long, because if you were watching your two friends have sex it probably wouldn’t be a fun and comfortable experience. The director wants you to know these characters. He wants you to be friends with these characters. And with that, he wants you to see all of them, even the parts you might not want to see. I understand if this doesn’t work for some people. It is definitely a choice that not everyone is going to agree with, but I personally agree with it and it is one of the reasons why I absolutely adore this film.

I one-hundred percent recommend this film. This is a three-hour long film that I have seen four times. I struggle to re-watch most films, and if I like this film enough to dedicate twelve hours of my life to it, then maybe at least try to watch it. It’s beautiful from start to finish. I sob at the end of the film and laugh at the beginning. If you are a fan of romance films, you owe it to yourself to watch this film and figure out if you love it or if it isn’t for you.

Weekly Episodes

Classic Episodes

Filmsplosion

Live Shows

Commentaries

The Shamley Silhouette

Reel Gamers

Denver FanExpo

Denver Comic-Con

More

Other

Articles

Reviews