Looking for something?
Archives
Archives
Find me!

Browsing Category Drama

Serious and plot-driven

Judy (2019)

11/02/2020 · by Joy

I will be the first to admit that I thought that Judy was going to be another Oscar-bait, old Hollywood, schlocky-type film. I was partially correct. Currently sitting at 82% on Rotten Tomatoes, I kind of fell in love with this little guy. I’m one of those people that reallllly enjoys a good biopic – I have enjoyed the surge of them in the past few years (I’m looking at you, Rocketman, and yes, even you, Bohemian Rhapsody), so yes, I have a biased interest coming into this one.

Going into Judy, I had very little knowledge of what Judy Garland’s life actually looked like. I knew she died young and I knew she had a turbulent childhood in showbiz and that… that is about it, my friends. Do I feel like I know now? Kind of.

The absolute heart of this movie lies with Renee. This is a performance that you can just tell Renee Zellweger poured herself into. Before the Oscars and before seeing Judy, I was pretty sure that Renee was going home with Best Actress and the reasons for that are clear: a movie about Hollywood – check, a movie about a real life person complete with actress impersonating said person – check, historical biopic – check. It was a shoe-in. I finished watching the Oscars and said, man, I really wish that Renee Zellweger hadn’t won Best Actress and it should have 100% gone to Saiorse… but now that I’ve actually seen the movie (funny how that changes an opinion), I see it. I see it and I understand it.

If ever there was a Renee performance that deserved Best Actress, it was this one. Her performance is tragic and her performance is fabulous. You can’t help but watch her and you can’t help but love her. I truly forgot I was watching Renee and slipped into the mindset that I was watching Judy Garland’s life unfold on my TV screen.

That said, Renee is carrying the film on her back. Without Renee’s stunning performance, there is little to commend – the plot is thin, the supporting cast is mediocre at best, and the writing is just okay.

All in all, I enjoyed the film, but solely based on Renee’s performance. I do think that Judy will be remembered as time elapses, but I think people will remember Renee’s performance without remembering anything else about the film, which is a pretty okay thing to remember it for after all.

A Star is Born (2018)

14/10/2018 · by Joy

I can’t begin to describe to you the reluctance I had in seeing this film. The reluctance due to the fact that I vastly misjudged Lady Gaga. I’ve always loved Bradley Cooper literally since seeing him in Wet Hot American Summer – you see him on film and he just has a certain authenticity about him. Plus, it super helps that he’s a beautiful, beautiful man. I had no reservations about seeing a Bradley Cooper movie.

Don’t get me wrong – I love (and I do mean love) musicals. I wish my voice was spectacular enough to be in one because I would be allll over that shit. And I love musicals that star those that don’t typically cross-over from film to recording studio – a la Johnny Depp (Crybaby), Rosario Dawson (Rent), etc. But for some reason, I didn’t think Lady Gaga could pull it off and I was so, so incredibly incorrect. Lady Gaga brought everything to the table. She was fantastic. Her acting was natural and, I hesitate to say it, but flawless. She was authentic, she was genuine, she filled the role perfectly. I read right after seeing the film that both Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper’s vocals were live and untouched and I believe it. Lady Gaga has a very powerful, distinct voice. It fills a room with any melody – any genre. She is extremely versatile.

Now, combine the two – one of my favourite actors and one of my favourite singers – and imagine… just imagine that they have perfect chemistry together. I am fully jumping on the bandwagon and saying that I for sure think that Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga belong together. Of course, I googled it and Lady Gaga is, in fact, married, and so is Bradley Cooper, but I just have to say… maybe not for long after their significant others see this movie.

This may come as a surprise to you, but I actually had no idea this was a remake, let alone a remake of a remake of a remake of a remake which was a loose remake of a film. That’s right, there is a 2013 Bollywood version which my mom postulates doesn’t count because it didn’t come to the Americas and I tend to agree, the 1976 version with Barbra Streisand, the 1954 version with Judy Garland, and the 1937 version with Janet Gaynor, which was a loose remake of What Price Hollywood? (1932). You bet your ass that I’m about to rent the rest of those A Star is Borns on the Google Play store and go to town (and probably subsequently die from an emotional breakdown because… wow).

For some reason, I wasn’t expecting such a wallop of an ending as I got and I lost it. Like, I’m not talking a few tears escaped the confines of my eyelids, I’m talking full-force, tears rolling down my cheeks and falling into my large, extra buttered popcorn. I was a mess. Over the course of 134 minutes, Bradley Cooper (who also directed this one, did I forget to mention that?) managed to build two incredibly loveable and realistic characters that had me wrapped around their pinky fingers. The character depth was built gradually with little unnecessary exposition – it felt natural and none of it felt like, “oh hey, we’re just saying this stuff for the benefit of the audience who has no clue what our history was”… it felt real. Interactions between Ally and Jackson Maine felt real, interactions between Jackson and Bobby felt raw, interactions between Ally and her father and Jack and Ally’s father – real. I don’t know if that speaks more to excellent writing or excellent casting – I guess a combination of both.

The music was phenomenal – like I said, Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga’s vocals were all live and unedited and it worked so well. Bradley Cooper altered his voice to sound deeper, more weathered, and way more gravelly and that also worked. You can tell a lot of effort and love went into shaping the perfect characters for this film. This may sound biased (because you already know I love B.C.), but I think that Bradley Cooper can do it all – he is a singer, he can act, and he’s got a beautiful (oh so beautiful) face. His voice wasn’t perfect, but it was real and it was open and I feel like I’ve used the word “real” maybe like 6 too many times in this review and I don’t care. I haven’t left the theatre (or my couch depending on whether I feel like putting on real pants that day or not) feeling this way in a long time – the feeling that new life has been breathed into my love for film. Thank you, Bradley Cooper (marry me?)

Report card:

Starring cast – amazing, perfect, wonderful.
Supporting cast (Sam Elliott, Anthony Ramos, Dave Chappelle) – perfect, couldn’t be any better if they tried.
Music – phenomenal, “Shallow” is the new theme song of my life.
Writing – great.
Story – heart-wrenching.
Bradley Cooper – A+++, shattered my heart into a million little pieces.

I, Tonya (2017)

19/07/2018 · by Joy

Oh, hello! It’s been a while. Like. Almost 6 months. And I’m about to review a movie I saw in theatres in December. But the point is, I’m here, okay? I’m reviewing a movie. I’m taking time out of my life to REVIEW a MOVIE.

I, Tonya is, of course, based on the true story of Tonya Harding’s steady climb to the top of the figure skating world, her 15 minutes of fame, and her wickedly quick fall back to rock bottom. I’ll be the first to say that I am not usually a fan of sports films, biographical or otherwise, but I, Tonya was definitely the exception to this rule.

I absolutely adored the format they went with for this film. It was shot in a documentary-like format starring Margot Robbie as Tonya Harding, Sebastian Stan as Jeff Gilooly, and my personal favourite, Allison Janney as LaVona Golden (Tonya’s mother). It kind of bounces back and forth between Tonya’s truth and Jeff’s truth while interspersing interesting and often contradictory commentary by LaVona, Tonya’s trainer, Jeff’s friend (and an international terrorism expert, according to him and him alone). The movie starts by framing Tonya as a total victim of circumstance – an abusive mother who is callous and condescending from the ripe age of 4 onwards, a father who left while Tonya cried in his rearview mirror for him to take her with him, and low socioeconomic status that bled into every arena of her life, skating included. While it doesn’t necessarily ‘side’ with Tonya Harding’s recount of the controversial 1994 events, it definitely doesn’t let her off the hook either. The film makes it very, very clear that the details of the crime are not and probably will never be completely known.

The atmosphere is light while covering relatively dark subject matter – domestic abuse, restraining orders, child abuse, abandonment issues, death threats, class prejudice… I was aware that what happened to Nancy Kerrigan was awful, that Tonya Harding’s life was not easy, and yet, I still found myself laughing. LaVona Golden is portrayed as an absolutely wretched individual but you can’t look away, you want to see more of her, you want to hear her voice and see her giant Sophia-from-Golden-Girls glasses and her bowl cut more and more.

I don’t know what it is about this movie but I loved it. I thought it should have been a Best Picture candidate, especially if Three Billboards was in the running. I think it’s because it does such a good job of showing completely biased material and making sure the audience is totally aware that some of these events are matters of opinion, some may have happened and some may not have occurred at all.

Margot Robbie portrayed Harding as a totally misguided, bull-headed woman who, while she made history by being the first American woman to land a triple-axel in competition, is also sorely misguided and has super-skewed morals. Did she play a part in Kerrigan’s injuries or did she not? I don’t know if we’ll ever really know for sure, but I think it’s safe to say it’s a strong possibility and either way, Gillespie did a great job with this portrayal of Tonya’s story.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)

29/01/2018 · by Joy

I’m not holding back on spoilers in this particular review because I feel the need to point out some gaping plot holes and… well, I just need to demonstrate how erratic the tonal shifts were. So, my apologies.

This year, I am waaay behind in watching the current Oscar Best Picture nominations. To be fair, I wanted so badly to see Lady Bird in theatres and it was here for like, a week, so I didn’t get to. I’m sure this one will be the same way – in & out before you can even utter its title. Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri: a tale of persistence that is simply unable to get it’s bearings on what tone it wants to convey. For the first probably 45 minutes of the movie, I was pretty much hooked. It sucked me in so fast, it kind of felt like I had come in in the middle of a film but I already knew what I needed to know. It was almost nice. But after a while, the tone started to take wild and erratic turns that were just… weird. At one point, we are aware that Woody Harrelson’s character is dying of pancreatic cancer (you know, the one with the famously low survival rate, so we definitely know what’s coming), but everything is going okay, Woody Harrelson and his weird (super out of place) wife are making jokes about their day and about Woody’s… er… noodly appendage. Next thing you know, his wife is making him go out to the stables and shovel horse shit even though he’s DYING?! What a lazy, ungrateful woman. Anyway, next thing you know, he’s committed suicide, but don’t worry, it then jumps back to comedic relief in the form of a letter written to his wife. It’s just… hard to follow, jarring, and it feels like someone totally shit the bed in the editing room. It’s like a very emotional rollercoaster, but it’s not fun.

There were a TON of plotholes that just kept jumping out at myself and my boyfriend on our ride home from the theatre. Characters completely do 180s on who they are as a person – Officer Dixon, a racist, asshole cop, suddenly shifts to being some kind of hailed hero after reading a letter from the now-deceased Woody Harrelson? I can see wanting to mend fences after being a total douche for the first half of the movie, but this was just like, he was a totally different character. He overhears a man in a bar talking about something he did to a girl and it’s pretty much word-for-word what happened to Angela Hayes in the film. He concocts this elaborate plan to get his DNA to test at the police station, getting himself pretty much beat to a pulp (instead of just, I don’t know, taking his beer bottle or something, but okay)… and then it turns out the DNA doesn’t match. I’m sorry, but that’s too much of a coincidence. That is WAY beyond suspension of disbelief. Why is this man hanging around Ebbing, Missouri so often? Why did he corner our main character in her workplace and hint that he was the man who did it? Why are the details of the occurrence literally the same? I’m sorry, that’s just not working for me. They could have written it in a much more subtle way that still made the audience suspect it was him, but didn’t have to feed it to us.

Why did Willoughby (Harrelson) wait until after he was dead to write Dixon a letter telling him how to be a better police officer? Why didn’t he just tell him that in person when he was alive? Why did the new police chief that witnessed Dixon throw someone out a second story window and then continue to beat on him for no particular reason say nothing about it? Dixon does end up getting fired, but not until he mouths off to the new chief. I.e., it has NOTHING to do with the fact that he beat an innocence man so badly it got him admitted to the hospital. Nope, no repercussions there. Okay.

Everyone seems to be pretty aware that it was Mildred (our main character) that set fire to the police station… but no repercussions there because Peter Dinklage is there to save the day with an alibi………………. ooookay.

Woody Harrelson’s wife is a supermodel with a weird British/Australian accent? She is beyond out of place in Missouri and again, it’s just not believable. Not to mention, she was an awwwwful actress.

McDormand was a fantastic actress and Harrelson was wonderful too. Actually, even Rockwell was really good. I think the flaws in this one come down to writing and plot – the more I think about it, the more questions I have and they’re not the good kind of “keeps you thinking” questions, they’re the kind that make you go, maybe this just wasn’t that good of a movie. I don’t know. I don’t see why this one is up for Best Picture and honestly I kind of wish I had spent my time watching The Shape of Water instead. Hoping I make it to that one before it’s out of theatres.

To be honest, if you skip this one, I don’t think you’re missing much.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)

24/01/2018 · by Joy

Starting off this review with a disclaimer: On the whole, I have not liked Yorgos Lanthimos’ previous films. I have seen both Dogtooth as well as The Lobster (or most of it anyway). Dogtooth I found at least somewhat intriguing and I did get through the whole film, and I really felt it had potential, however, The Lobster was the most pretentious drivel I have ever tried to watch in my entire lifetime, and I tried to sit through Chevalier at the Film Festival last year (more pretentious Greek drivel, albeit directed by someone else). So anyway, I was pretty well-equipped to turn the film off halfway through because I was fed up. I was fully and 100% prepared.

The slow-as-molasses pacing is very familiar. I got very distinct Nocturnal Animals, It Comes At Night (review coming, I promise), and of course, The Lobster vibes from it. Now, two out of three of those movies, I greatly disliked. There were differences between those 3 films at The Killing of a Sacred Deer, though, and one of the biggest ones was that I found the essence of this film to be much more ominous and much more compelling. The characters were all unsettling… probably even the ones that you’re supposed to like and feel empathetic towards, honestly. Everyone was stone-faced and completely devoid of emotion most of the time except maaaybe Nicole Kidman’s character. Kind of. The only character that really felt like he was playing the “right” role was Barry Keoghan – but the problem is, he’s supposed to be a stone-cold sociopath and the rest of the characters are not.

It wasn’t until the climactic ending that I realized this was supposed to be somewhat of a black comedy. It’s definitely not a film that you are supposed to connect or relate to — how can you, honestly? It’s bizarre and super esoteric and I have to say, I wouldn’t venture to watch it a second time. I mean, it wasn’t like, a struggle to get through it, but it wasn’t an enjoyable ride either.

The one thing I can and will gladly say is that the cinematography was on point. Some of the shots were just absolutely gorgeous. I don’t know, I don’t even really know what my opinion of this one is because it was just such a… strange movie. I didn’t come out thinking, “what a waste of 2 hours of my life,” but I also didn’t come out thinking, “that was wonderful, I am a changed person” so I guess it’s just kind of… “meh.” Not a total flop, but kind of disappointing… not a great success, but definitely there was ‘something’ there.

mother!

23/09/2017 · by Joy

If you have seen the trailer for mother! and you’re not entirely sure what it’s about, you’re not alone. I saw the same trailer for it probably 5 or 6 times and left feeling intrigued and also extremely confused. Now that I’ve seen the movie, I’m still intrigued… and still somewhat confused. If you’re going to see mother! and you’re expecting a horror… you won’t exactly get that. If you’re going to see a thriller, I mean you won’t entirely get that either. It doesn’t really fit in any one genre. Even if you asked Aronofsky himself, I doubt he’d have an answer to which genre it should be assigned to, honestly.

Having said all that, I really enjoyed it. Some critics are hailing it as a masterpiece, some are calling it a mess. I wouldn’t call it either. The first thing you have to be willing to understand and accept if you’re going to see it… is that it’s a Darren Aronofsky film. Some of the most bizarre and most “pretentious” films came out of this man’s vision – Black Swan, The Fountain, Requiem for a Dream. While all are good films, Aronofsky seems to enjoy creating a film that is so atmospheric that you’re unsettled and disturbed by what you’ve just watched. And he accomplishes his task very well.

It’s clear that a ton of thought and effort went into crafting this allegorical story. I’m not going to pussyfoot around this one, there are going to be straight up spoilers, because it’s impossible to review this movie without spoiling it. It took me almost the entirety of the film to figure out what it was going for – for about 75% of the movie, I was sure it was just a woman going crazy with paranoia in her home – but the last 25% of the film solidified for me that Jennifer Lawrence playing “mother” was of course, Mother Earth, and the film was the literal expanse of human history. It starts out slow and solitary, mother and Him being the only two beings in existence. Slowly, but surely, people start to show up… first a man, then a woman, then their children… then the general human populace, until the last 30 minutes of the film is filled with chaos and destruction. Sound familiar? It should. It’s kind of genius in that sense. They took a 2 hour film and crammed the entirety of human existence into it, proportionally. The more I think about it, the more impressed I am by the metaphors and the fact that I didn’t grasp most of what I watched until after I left the theatre. I couldn’t stop thinking about it and I immediately went home to google it and to confirm if what I was thinking was actually what they were intending (it was, and then some!) I can’t help it – I’m impressed.

I loved most of the casting – I mean, Javier Bardem as “Him,” Ed Harris as “the man,” Michelle Pfeiffer as “the woman” and Kristen Wiig randomly appearing towards the end of the film… if that didn’t throw me off my game, I don’t know what did. Jen… oh, Jen. I love Jennifer Lawrence and I think she’s an extremely talented actress, but I can’t help but think she was horribly miscast. Whereas Jen is typically a bold actress who isn’t afraid to play controversial or difficult roles, she was cast as a meek and selfless mother. It just didn’t fit. She acted so well and she was still really good, it just wasn’t the best casting choice, I suppose!

All in all, if you’re looking for an uncomfortable 2 hours with gore, some disturbing imagery, and a look into what our future could hold as the human race… this is where you need to come. Tense and claustrophobic, it’s an Aronofksy film through and through, that’s for sure.

Chevalier (2015)

30/04/2017 · by Joy

There are many things I don’t do in movie theatres, because it’s rude, because I hate it when people around me do it, because I think films should get your full attention (especially if you’ve paid to come and have a theatre experience in its honour). Things like using my phone in a theatre, talking to the person beside me, kicking the seat(s) in front of me… or leaving the theatre before the film has ended (other than to go to the washroom, of course). Today, I broke one of my own unwritten rules of the theatre. I stood up at about the halfway point in a film and I left. For reference, I’ve sat through some pretty abysmal films – my friend Paula reminded me that we sat through the entirety of Magic Mike when it was released in 2012 which I thought was about as poor as this film was… which is funny because they have very similar RottenTomatoes ratings (they’re both rated fresh, if you can believe it).

I can’t understate how excited I was to see Chevalier… honestly, this was the film I wanted to see – if I only saw one, this was going to be it, and I think that made it all the more disappointing. The trailer depicted this film as a hilarious movie about 6 men who are stuck on a boat and competing in the most ridiculous contests to determine who is the “Best in General” – contests where points are awarded and deducted pretty arbitrarily for things like sucking in one’s stomach? For tanning one’s legs? Vomiting? Who caught the biggest fish? I don’t know, it seemed like a comedy about men and their tendency to go overboard to ‘prove their worth,’ so to speak. That is not what I got. I don’t care what anyone says, the trailer is strictly false advertising.

Of course, I can’t comment on the end of the film. Maybe it all gets tied together, maybe the pay-off is great? I don’t know. BUT I sincerely doubt that any pay-off could be worth the suffering I endured for the first hour of the film. I was bored out of my mind. I fell asleep for little moments probably about four times. I squirmed in my seat, and not out of claustrophobia or a sense of being unsettled, out of boredom. I was in awe… of how bored I was. The cinematography was… wow. They didn’t know when to cut. We don’t need to see a panning shot of the entire boat that we’ve seen 8,000 times already. We don’t need to see the entirety of a boat making a turnaround, we get the point already! Nothing was funny. Not one character was likeable. The acting was okay at best. If you’re going to make a movie about 6 men having a pissing contest on a boat, you have to make the characters have some sort of relationship, a sort of camaraderie, with each other. I’m not sure how these men knew each other, were related, how they ended up on a boat together. I’m not sure why they were there. Were they working? Were they on a cruise? Vacation? I DON’T KNOW. Nothing was explained.

There was conflict, but I don’t know why or why it matters.

This is a film that I would choose to skip. I would like to go back in time and choose a different film. Needless to say, I am unimpressed.

Burn Your Maps (2016)

30/04/2017 · by Joy

Alas, another Sunday spent at the local Cineplex theatre. Today, we had planned once again to see three films, but unfortunately, being hard-working young people who work full-time, we have so many things to do around the house to prepare for the upcoming week, we’ve had to cut it down to two again! Our first film of the day started promptly at 12:00: Burn Your Maps. Directed by Jordan Roberts (who also did the screenplay for the animated film Big Hero 6) and starring the effervescent Vera Farmiga (The Conjuring, Bates Motel) and the incredibly talented Jacob Tremblay (Room), it 110% blew. me. away.

Going in, I was expecting to either be thrilled with the result or absolutely appalled and I’m glad to say it was the former, all the way. My boyfriend was on the fence about seeing it at all, but I’m so glad I was able to convince him (because obviously I can’t go to a screening ALONE, what do you think I am…) because this is probably one of my top 3 movies of 2016 (and possibly of all-time, but I could just be writing the “Fantastic Movie” wave with that one… only time will tell).

Burn Your Maps tells the story of a 9-year-old boy formerly named Wes, but who has now chosen a Mongolian name that I can’t remember and can’t find anywhere within the depths of the Internet. Wes, who is grieving alongside his entire family for his baby sister who passed away 10 months prior, has decided that America is not where he belongs – America is not his home. Rather, he belongs in Mongolia herding goats. It sounds super-ridiculous, that I will agree with you on, but man… it was a fantastic film. It was just the right amount of weird with a perfect balance between ‘hilarious’ and ‘heartbreaking.’ Tremblay is one of my favourite up and coming actors and BY FAR my favourite child actor… he is fantastic and this film proves that Room was no one-off, he really is that talented. He makes the film alongside his understanding and ever-supportive mother, played by Vera Farmiga. I love Farmiga in everything I’ve seen her in and this was truly no exception. I really want to say that she is the perfect actress (and also, maybe kinda sorta my spirit animal). I love her.

The whole cast is fantastic, including Marton Csokas, who plays the stern father of Wes who is struggling to keep himself together and feeling ripped apart by grief in silence. I’ve seen a review or two now that say his acting is wooden and stiff, but I honestly take that as just part of his character. If it’s an acting flaw, it fits. Suraj Sharma plays Farmiga’s ESL student from India who strikes a bond with Wes through their shared sense of displacement where they’re “supposed” to belong.

Burn Your Maps is an extremely well-written, well-acted, well-directed piece of film. It’s a film that allows you to lose your sense of time, it was so well-paced. A shining beacon of light that I wished I’d have seen AFTER I saw the next film, but that’s another story for the next review…

En man som heter Ove / A Man Called Ove (2016)

23/04/2017 · by Joy

It makes me so sad how often people write off a film because it’s foreign and/or because it’s subtitled. Some of the best films I’ve seen have been subtitled and after a while, you get so used to watching movies with subtitles that you start watching English movies with subtitles… and here I am. Doing that frequently.

Anyway, my second movie of the NOFSA Film Festival was A Man Called Ove. Ove is pronounced oh-vay, by the way. I learned this pretty much instantly. It is not pronounced oh-vvvv as I was under the impression previously (I am ashamed, I am uncultured swine). We got stuck at the front because apparently a lot more people wanted to see A Man Called Ove than had wanted to see Hello, Destroyer, which is not surprising since Ove was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film of the Year at this past Oscars ceremony! It unfortunately lost to The Salesman, which I’m going to see next Sunday (maybe I’ll get there a bit earlier this time, though).

I was far more impressed with Ove than I was with Destroyer! I almost want to watch it again, it was that good. Ove is a grouchy, yet oddly loveable old Swedish man and while you should hate him in the first 10 minutes of the film for his stringent application of the rules and regulations of his neighbourhood and the way he calls small dogs “winter boots,” you just can’t. From the get-go, he’s endearing in his grouchiness. Throughout the course of the film, you learn Ove’s entire life story bit by bit as he: befriends his new neighbours, Parvaneh, Patrick and their two daughters; fights for his old friend, Rune; mourns his wife, Sonja; and finally, adopts a stray (seemingly purebred Ragdoll) cat.

When we first meet Ove, he’s trying to commit suicide and join his wife in the afterlife, however, it turns out to be relatively difficult since there are so many DARN interruptions going on around him. Each time he tries a new method, continually only to look out the window and notice someone breaking the rules or to have someone knock on his door, which sounds like a gimmicky attempt at getting cheap laughs, but it works. It really, really works.

By the end of the film, I was so attached to so many of these characters that are so quirky in their own ways. The movie spent a lot of time making sure you got to know each character well. I mean, I had questions about certain motivations, but they were flaws I was willing and able to let go because in the grand scheme of the film, they didn’t matter that much. What mattered was Ove, and his character, and his friendships, and his rounds.

A Man Called Ove was touching and heartwarming without going overboard and being too sentimental or sappy. It was really well done and you can definitely colour me impressed!

Hello, Destroyer (2016)

23/04/2017 · by Joy

There is a film festival happening in my hometown currently, being put on by the North of Superior Film Association and I purchased a 6-pack of tickets to go see some movies! Unfortunately, I found that they’re all very close together in times and some overlap, so it’s impossible to go see them all… but nonetheless, my first watch of the festival was this film: Hello, Destroyer.

Hello, Destroyer is directed and written by Kevan Funk, who has previously written and directed numerous shorts, but no feature films. It is sort of, but not really, but also kind of, building upon his previous short entitled Destroyer. Going in, I knew next to nothing about the film – I knew the plot synopsis and that was it. “A young hockey player deals with the consequences of hockey violence after he critically injures another player during a game.” So naturally, I think hockey = action = bustling film that doesn’t stop! Boy, was I wrong.

For the first half-hour or so, I was pretty into it. I cared about the characters, I was interested in the story, I wanted to know what would happen in the coming moments. I did notice right from the get-go that there were a lot of silent moments with nothing happening. Not just like, they idled a tiny bit too long to keep you on edge and feeling uncomfortable. Like, they had scenes that were just the main character, Tyson, staring at something and not emoting, not doing anything, for a solid 1-2 minutes at a time. They had shots of walls. Not only were the cinematography choices strange and unsettling, they made the movie feel like it was at least an hour too long. You could tell that the director had more experience with short films and that’s the format he was used to, because the story and the ambling plot felt like it was more suited to being a short film.

I was straight up bored. I felt, in those hanging moments, like this was wasted screen time. They could be showing us something, but instead there seemed to be nothing to show so they filled up those moments with… nothing. Filler. I was reading up on the reviews of this film afterwards and learned of things that were supposed to be metaphors, but I didn’t catch that and I didn’t think they were very clever or strong or compelling after learning that they were there, either.

All-in-all, Hello, Destroyer felt like a film that bit off more than it could chew. It felt like it was trying to be something a lot bigger than it was and that was it’s eventual downfall. It wasn’t a horrible movie by any means… I just felt that it lacked spirit and it could have been a lot more, especially had they given it’s lead, Jared Abrahamson, more to work with.

I wanted to see Studio Ghibli’s The Red Turtle, but we were hungry and there was only a half hour delay between this film and the next, so we opted to skip it for now. Tonight, we are going to see A Man Called Ove, which I’m really excited for!

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next »