A somewhat belated top ten favourite movies of the year. My top six was easy, after that there were at least ten contenders for the final four places. A note on selection. Poor Things is a 2023 movie but not released in the UK until this year. Had I seen it last year it would comfortably made my top ten.
1 – Anatomy of a Fall – I went into this movie knowing nothing about it, in fact I didn’t even know what I was going into having seen it at an Odeon Screen Unseen screening. Cleverly constructed, perfectly acted and giving an insight into the French legal system with is very different to the British one.
2 – Babylon – The birth of Hollywood, it’s basically Singing in the Rain on steroids, or crack! Divisive but brilliant.
3 – Oppenheimer – Totally stunning film that manages to make people talking in rooms tense interesting. It also manages to have a profound message at its heart.
4 – Past Lives – A couple of people walking and talking doesn’t sound very cinematic, but this is a beautiful film. (Rye Lane a more comedic take on the concept nearly made my list too)
5 – Sisu – Finish action-adventure movie where the leading character hardly speaks. Its brutal, but brilliant.
6 – Saltburn – Emerald Fennell’s second feature is a satirical black comedy/psychological thriller about class and social mobility.
7 – Killers of the Flower Moon – Great storytelling from a master filmmaker with outstanding performances. It is a little rushed and would have made a better six-hour mini-series.
8 – Infinity Pool – Brandon Cronenberg following in his fathers’ footsteps with a seriously bonkers movie with surprising depth. Mia Goth is always worth watching!
9 – Tàr – I keep a running top ten throughout the year, this film dropped off the bottom of the list a few months ago, but when it came to compiling this final list I just couldn’t let go for some reason, probably Cate Blanchett’s mesmerising performance.
10 – The Creator – There are better films that didn’t make my top ten, but I really enjoyed watching it, and it proved again that you can make an original Sci-Fi movie you don’t have to keep dipping into the IP well. It also looked a lot better than movies costing twice as much to make.
Is Die Hard a Christmas movie? What is the best Christmas Movie? Who is the best movie Santa? We get all these questions every year, but nobody ever seems to ask about new year movies. There are lots of great movies with scenes set over new year such as The Godfather Part 2, The Apartment, Phantom Thread, Carol, and Ghostbusters 2. But there is one film that stands out for me, not only as a great film and one of the most underrated films of the 90’s, but as my favourite new year movie: Strange Days.
2023 has seen the return of many great shows, The Bear, Foundation, Slow Horses. The final series of others Succession, and Sex Education. And the resurrection of another Justified: City Primeval Review. But what are the best new shows?
A Murder at The End Of The World – A psychological thriller with more than a hint of Scandi noir from Brit Marling and Zal Batmanglij the team behind The OA. On paper it doesn’t do anything original or special, but what it does, it does perfectly. Emma Corrin is clearly set for great things.
Silo – Based on Wool, the first of Hugh Howey’s Silo series of books. The high concept of the setting is perfectly realised from the books. The real key to the success of the adaptation is the casting which is perfect from top to bottom particularly Rebecca Ferguson in the lead.
The Last of Us – Video games are notorious for being adapted into very poor movies. Having never played the game I can only go on what I am told, but I understand it is a faithful adaptation. Whatever the reason, it makes a compelling watch.
Daisy Jones & The Six – The rise and fall of a rock band through the 1970’s. Making great use of framing device and elevated by decent songs performed by the cast including a standout Riley Keough. I haven’t read Taylor Jenkins Reid’s book of the same name, to be honest I hadn’t heard of it so don’t know how faithful it is.
The Fall Of The House Of Usher – Mike Flanagan is back, and back on top form co-writing, and directing all eight episodes of this mini-series. Cleverly constructed, the overriding story is based on Edgar Allan Poe’s short story The Fall of the House of Usher, but each episode is inspired by a different Poe story.
Lockwood & Co. – Criminally cancelled by Netflix seemingly as soon as the show aired. A young adult supernatural detective thriller why a great concept and compelling characters played by actors who don’t look a decade older than they should.
The Continental – Set in the 1970’s in the world of John Wick and telling the backstory of Winston Scott and how he became proprietor of The New York Continental. A violent and stylish thriller that makes the most of its period setting in a grimy and dangerous New York.
Interview With the Vampire – A second adaptation of Ann Rice’s vampire novel following Neil Jordan’s 1994 film adaptation. There is an interesting twist on the framing device of the titular interview. Best of all it has time to revel in the period setting that the film didn’t.
Poker Face – In an era of longform storytelling an episodic mystery of the week show isn’t that compelling, but it really works in this Rian Johnson created show. An excellent selection of co-stars helps, but the real draw is Natasha Lyonne.
Kaleidoscope – When you have a radical concept, you can be in danger of it overshadowing the whole show, this doesn’t happen here, as the contents have to work on their own merit for the concept to work. Eight colour coded episodes that can be watched in any order. Regardless of the order, the story never changes but you perception may change.
Alaska Daily – Hilary Swank vehicle that was sadly cancelled before it was even available in the UK. A story of the week format with an ongoing story too. A fictional story but inspired by real events reported in Anchorage Daily News about missing, murdered, and Sexual Violence against Indigenous women. Despite the hard hitting subject matter the show has a light touch.
Honourable mentions
A few of nearly new shows: Gen V, a spinoff from The Boys offering more than what you would expect from the original show. Lizze Broadway is the standout star. Justified: City Primeval is a continuation of Justified offering more of what you would expect but in a different setting. Rosario Dawson reprises her role from The Mandalorian, this time, but the time Ahsoka is the titular character. 1923, the Yellowstone spinoff came to the UK at the start of the year, not as good as the other spinoff 1883, but still worth watching.
I’m only one episode into Blue Eye Samurai, so can’t really put it on the list, but from what I have seen so far it probably would have made it had I seen more.
I have heard great things about the following shows, but haven’t seen them yet: Boiling Point, Monarch: Legacy Of Monsters, Scott Pilgrim Takes Off, and One Piece.
And the most disappointing shows, not necessarily the worst, but ones I expected more from: Secret Invasion started well but quickly came off the rails. The cast isn’t bad, and Olivia Coleman is great but the storytelling is incoherent at best. Mayfair Witches, set within the same universe as Interview With The Vampire, but not on the same level, frankly it’s a bit boring. Citadel is a lavish and ambitious spy thriller. Unfortunately, its all a bit silly and over relies on CGI. Lesley Manville and Stanley Tucci are fun in supporting roles. Fubar, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s attempt at TV wants to be fun and funny, sadly its neither.
Look out for my best movies of the year to be posted in the next few days.
Zack Snyder is the most frustrating director, he has proved with some of his best works, Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen that he can tell a story in an exciting in engaging way. He also has an amazing visual flair and sense of style. This really shines in a movie like Sucher Punch, which while both problematic and disjointed in its narrative, it does look fantastic. Then we have the incoherent and self-indulgent side to his character. His tenure at the head of the DC Extended Universe started so well with Man of Steel, or at least the first two thirds of the movie. It soon descends into CGI things crashing into each other. It got worse with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. But then came Zack Snyder’s Justice League. If you are reading this you probably know the story, if not a brief history of the movie: A troubled production from day one, the script was under constant revision both before and during production. When Snyder stepped down for personal reasons during post-production, Joss Whedon was hired to finish the film, with an edict from Warner Bros. to make the film shorter, lighter (in tone and appearance) and with more humour. The result was terrible. For years the toxic element of Snyder and the DCEU’s fanbase insisted there was a complete “SnyderCut” and it was is the greatest film of all time. The ultimate urban myth, nobody had seen it, or knew anyone who had seen it, but everyone knew someone, who knew someone who had seen it! Finally, after $70million of reshoots and postproduction the film was finished and released. It was an improvement of the cinematic release, but not a great one especially as it was hampered by an unnecessary bloated four-hour runtime.
Now free of the constraints of the DCEU Snyder has turned his attention to his Star Wars project, Rebel Moon. Starting life out as a pitch for a Star Wars, its easy to see the origin. A totalitarian militaristic empire is on a mission to wipe out rebellion. Funded by Netfix, Part One, A Child of Fire was released this week with part two due in the spring. The setup is simple, a gigantic imperial spaceship finds itself hovering over a peaceful farming village on an independent planet, things happen, and the farmers decided to fight back against impossible odds. What we essentially have is Battle Beyond the Stars, Roger Corman’s 1980 space opera that takes the scenario of Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven and transposes it to outer space. While Battle Beyond the Stars was a cheap movie conceived to exploit the popularity of Star Wars, Rebel Moon is a lavish epic with a fully formed mythology. The connections between the good and evil characters are very Star Wars, as is the empire. But when you break it down how original is Star Wars? When you go back to the Flash Gordon comic strip of the 1930’s the big bad, Ming the Merciless was originally not named and just called “The Emperor”. The idea of the Empire, and resistance to it could be inspired by any number of real-life Empires. This negates any criticism for lack of originality, but does the same for any originality. We can only judge what is onscreen, and what we have with Rebel Moon is a mixed bag. On a positive note, the world building is pretty good, the characters aren’t bad. Some of the action is really well shot, despite an overuse of CGI and of slow motion.
As frustrating as its director, Rebel Moon is an unsatisfying movie made up of good ideas. To its credit, it does work both as a complete narrative and as the introduction to a wider world and its mythology. Not as good as Zack Snyder’s legion of fans will have you believe, but not as bad as its critical panning suggest. I probably won’t ever watch it again, but will watch part two.
The quote that started it all in the Nick De Semlyen interview came after a question about de-ageing in the Irishman. “I don’t see them,” he says of the MCU. “I tried, you know? But that’s not cinema. Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well-made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isn’t the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.”
A notable thing is that he doesn’t criticise the actors or directors, he doesn’t even say they are bad movies. What he is saying is that they aren’t for him. The comments have been recycled many times in the years since they appeared in Empire making it impossible not to mention the when talking to the director today. In the more recent GQ interview with Zach Baron, Scorsese talks about how studios won’ support directors “voices” any longer. He suggests studios are only interested in creating “content”. Although his last two films have received a cinematic release, they were both funded by streamers (Netflix and Apple TV) rather than traditional studios. But he is optimistic that there will always be a place for cinemas/theatres. “I think there will always be theatrical, because people want to experience this thing together,” Scorsese said. “But at the same time, the theaters have to step up to make them places where people will want to go and enjoy themselves or want to go and see something that moves them.” It was inevitable that the conversation would find its way back to the MCU. “The danger there is what it’s doing to our culture,” Scorsese said. “Because there are going to be generations now that think movies are only those—that’s what movies are.”
“They already think that. Which means that we have to then fight back stronger. And it’s got to come from the grassroots level. It’s gotta come from the filmmakers themselves. And you’ll have, you know, the Safdie brothers, and you’ll have Chris Nolan, you know what I mean? And hit ’em from all sides. Hit ’em from all sides, and don’t give up. Let’s see what you got. Go out there and do it. Go reinvent. Don’t complain about it. But it’s true, because we’ve got to save cinema.” Cinema could be anything, Scorsese said; it didn’t just have to be serious. Some Like It Hot—that was cinema, for instance. But: “I do think that the manufactured content isn’t really cinema.”
“No, I don’t want to say it. But what I mean is that, it’s manufactured content. It’s almost like AI making a film. And that doesn’t mean that you don’t have incredible directors and special effects people doing beautiful artwork. But what does it mean? What do these films, what will it give you? Aside from a kind of consummation of something and then eliminating it from your mind, your whole body, you know? So what is it giving you?”
I am a fan of comic book movies, I have seen all the MCU films at the cinema and think there are three or four genuinely great films in the franchise. However, I wouldn’t want a time when I that was all I would see at the cinema. But I actually don’t think this will happen. There is a glimmer of hope when you see that Christopher Nola’s Oppenheimer is third in the world box-office with just under a $1billion. If you then counter this with what is happening to comic book movies. The DC Extended Universe (DCEU) has been in turmoil since the day it was created and is about to go through some sort of reboot, it is also hamstrung by cinemas most toxic fans. The MCU in contrast hardly put a foot wrong for two dozen movies over a ten-year period. But for the last few years it has been hit and miss both in box-office takings and critical reception. The latest movie, The Marvels is a mid-tier, fun movie with a reasonable critical reception, I like it. However, it has suffered a disastrous opening day. Earning $21.5 million on its opening day in America making it the second lowest opening day nestled between The Incredible Hulk $21.46 million, and Ant-Man $22.6 million. This compares to Captain Marvel $153 million. If this continues the franchise will become unsustainable. How will this look? Will it explode, implode or fade away? Whatever happens, a new era of movies is an exciting prospect, it has happened before, and it will happen again. Genre’s have gone in and out of favour, but there are other bigger changes and inventions: Sound, Colour, The Motion Picture Production Code, and Television.
Then came “New Hollywood” or The American New Wave. A movement responsible for some of the best movies ever made, a movement that Martin Scorsese was at the heart of. Whether large or small, Scorsese’s movies have always been personal but two of his friends and contemporaries had a differ impact on cinema. With Jaws and Star Wars, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas invented the Blockbuster, the 1970’s equivalent to the comic book movie.
My first article with the prefix ‘Somebody Make a Film About’ was over a decade ago. I have only written a couple since, but all with the same theme, historical figures that have not had the screentime they deserve.
One figure that came to mind was Alfred the Great. King of the West Saxons and then King of the Anglo-Saxons, it could be argued that he was the first King of England. His most notable screen appearances are the 1969 movie Alfred the Great, and as a supporting character in the TV series The Last Kingdom based on Bernard Cornwell’s Saxon Stories. King form 871 to 899, a period that we don’t see often in films. However, the more I looked into it, the more I thought the more interesting person who is largely overlooked is Alfred’s daughter Æthelflæd, Lady of the Mercians. She also appeared as a character in The Last Kingdom played by Millie Brady. On the whole history was written by men, one of them being Æthelflæd’s father Alfred who oversaw The Saxon Chronicles. Sadly the more interesting period of her life came after Alfred’s death.
Firstly, a little background. By early fifth century The Romans had left Briton. After this time there was a migration of from mainland Europe, mainly northern Germany and southern Scandinavia, the Anglo-Saxons (Angles and Saxons were two different groups and the term Anglo-Saxon wasn’t used until the tenth century). By the sixth century England as we now know it was split into seven Kingdoms: Northumbria, Mercia, Wessex, Sussex, Kent, Essex and East Anglia. During the seventh and eighth centuries Mercia expanded dramatically and ran from Chester in the northwest down to London in the southeast and bordered Wales to the west (you have probably heard of Offa’s dyke). The first confirmed Viking attack on came in 793 at Lindisfarne. This was followed my many smaller invasions until The Great Heathen Army, aka The Viking Great Army invaded England in 865. A coalition of Scandinavians larger than any previous Viking force with the intention of conquering and occupying England, in particular the kingdoms of East Anglia, Mercia, Northumbria, and Wessex. It was during this chaotic time that Alfred inherited the throne of Wessex from his elder brother Æthelred in 871 arounder a year after the birth of Æthelflæd. By this time most of the country was under Danish rule. Alfred was never intended to be King; his two elder brothers held the position before him, the second of which had two sons. However, it is suggested the brothers agreed that in the event of Æthelred’s death Alfred would take over. There wasn’t a strict rule of succession at the time, and the king was decided by a Witan, a council of “wise men” that formed something akin to a cross between a government and the king’s advisors.
I lived in Tamworth as a child and taught a little local history in middle school. I first became aware of Æthelflæd when I visited Tamworth Castle at this time. The existing building is Norman built in the 1080’s however there has been a fortification on the site from the time of Offa in the mid eighth century. Much of the town was rebuilt by Æthelflæd and fortified in 913, the Mercian Register describes the town as being fortified with an earthen burh. This is believed to be the location of the existing castle. There is a statue of her in castle grounds dating from 1913, a thousand years after her reconstruction of the town. She died in Tamworth in 918. In 2018, 1,100 years after her death a further statue was erected in Tamworth. Located outside the towns railway station she holds a long spear that points towards the castle, and the town centre. But I am getting ahead of myself.
Alfred was famed for his enthusiasm for learning, and it is believed he educated his own children not just in history and religion, but affairs of state. In turn she educated her nephew Æthelstan (eldest son of her brother Edward the elder) who became king of both Wessex and Mercia and is sometimes referred to as the first King of England. His coronation dook place at Kingston upon Thames on the border between the two kingdoms rather than one of the capitols Winchester and Tamworth. J.R.R. Tolkien was a great student of history particularly this period, the historian Tom Holland has speculated that Rohan was based on Mercia, and was the inspiration for Eowyn in The Lord of the Rings. In 878 following three years of war against the Guthrum the Danish King of East Anglia, Alfred and his family are forced to abandon Winchester and flee to Somerset Levels (it was at this time where the most likely apocryphal burnt cakes story is based). From here, they fight a guerilla war against the Danish invaders before winning a decisive battle and returning home. Growing up the daughter of a king at this time would be enough to make an interesting story, but there is far more to Æthelflæd.
In 874 Danes sacked Tamworth exiling the king Burgred, who incidentally was married to Alfreds sister Æthelswith. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle suggests that he lived out his days in Rome. The throne of the remaining western half of Mercia was passed to Ceolwulf II, the last independent King of Mercia. The date of the end of Ceolwulf’s rule is disputed, some suggesting he remained king until her was replaced by Æthelred, Lord of the Mercians in 883, others believe he died in 879. Little is known of Æthelred origin or claim to Mercia but what is significant is that his rule was supported by Alfred, if not engineered by Alfred. Accepting Alfreds Lordship, he ruled Mercia semi-autonomously, but was only ever Lord of the Mercians, not King. There was something of a paradox where Mercia was equal to but ultimately subservient to Wessex. He ruled the western half of Mercia with Danish rule in the east. To strengthen the bond, or possibly his grip over Mercia, Alfred married his daughter Æthelflæd to Æthelred. The date of the union is a little sketch but probably around 890 making Æthelflæd around twenty years of old, Æthelred’s age isn’t know but is believed to be much older. Around this time, in 886 Alfred regained London Danish control and passed it back to Mercia. Alfred then received the submission of all English not under Viking control he then declared himself the king of the Anglo-Saxons, effectively King of England.
Æthelflæd (from The Cartulary and Customs of Abingdon Abbey, c. 1220)
In the years that followed Æthelred fought off several Viking attacks along with Æthelflæd’s brother (and future King) Edward. Edward the Elder was crowned in 899 following the death of his father. Around the same time Æthelred’s health started to fail, and Æthelflæd is believed to have become de facto ruler of Mercia. The is no contemporary sources explaining his ailment, but it is widely believed that he was considerably older than Æthelflæd. She took over officially in 911 on the death of her husband and ruled in her own right until her death in Tamworth in 918. Possibly helped by geography including its western border being with Wales kept Mercia relatively settled during England’s most turbulent time. Alfred is credited for building a network fortified settlements known as of burhs. This proved valuable in defending against Viking attacks. Edward, Æthelred, and Æthelflæd continued developing the fortifications including Bridgnorth, Stafford, Tamworth, Warwick, Wednesbury. They also fortified Worcester. It is possible that this is why these towns and cities exist today.
It wasn’t just about defence. In the 910, Æthelflæd and her brother Edward the Elder invaded and ultimately conquered Danish territories in Northumbrian and East Anglia. Many Danish rulers were allowed to keep their land in exchange for accepting Wessex and Mercia as overlords. This was a large step towards their father’s vision of a united England. York also accepted Æthelflæd as an overlord, but she died before this happened. Interestingly this agreement wasn’t extended to her brother Edward who succeeded her. She also launched, or possibly even led an expedition into Danish ruled Northumbria to reclaim the relics of St Oswald. This main seem like a trivial endeavour in an enlightened age, however the Danes were pagan and Christianity was often elevated to a mystical level at this time.
Coming at the end of what is sometimes called The Dark Ages (historians prefer Early Middle Ages or Early Medieval Period) where there is limited written history not that much is know about anybody who lived at the time. Did she ride into battle with her army? How influential was she politically? We do not know, because as mentioned at the start Æthelflæd has been largely omitted or written out of history. This makes a regular biographical movie impossible, but let’s be honest how historically accurate are those movies at the best of times? But we know enough and there are sufficient dots to join between the fact we do know. This incudes the nearly two decades she ruled on her own and in place of her ailing husband.
I was recently at a festival with a friend who I was at university with nearly thirty years ago. There were a long of teenagers wearing 90’s band T-shirts, the most common was Nirvana. Jon the friend in question said that when he sees his teenage daughters friends wearing shirts like this he asks which is their favourite Nirvana album, knowing many of them will not be able to name any. This started a conversation with two threads.
1: This isn’t anything new, back in the 90’s Ramones shirts were common, I often wore a Who T-shirt. To set the scene, Jon was just getting into music in the late early mid 90’s and this era remains his favourite. His favourite band was/is Oasis; there was a time when he and other followers of the band seemed to elevate fandom during the (manufactured) Blur v Oasis war to a raison d’être. I on the other hand had been buying records since I was a young child. Having gone through many genres, by this time I had settled on Rock, and actually listened to more 70’s than contemporary bands, my favourites being The Who, The Doors, and Led Zeplin. About half of all my music collection was recorded before I was born, some of it even before my parents were born.
2: Why would kids today have a favourite Nirvana album? Many of them have never even held an album whether it be 12-inch vinyl or CD. People consume music differently these days. My current and my previous cars both had CD player, one hidden in the glovebox, and one at elbow level between the seats. I have never played a CD in either car, not because of the inconvenient location, but because I no longer listen to CDs except in a few examples where I can’t stream them. Things were very different when I first got into music. My most common way of listening was a Walkman. You could fast forward between tracks, but it wasn’t an exact science, consequently I would listen to whole albums. I did make mixtapes (who didn’t) but they were always made up from records I owned (or borrowed from friends). You can pick out a tract on a vinyl record, or skip a CD, but you are limited to what is on that disc. If you are streaming music you are only limited by which platforms you have access to. The top five Nirvana songs (according to a top ten readers poll in Rolling Stone magazine) are Lithium, Smells Like Teen Spirit, Heart Shaped Box, Come as You Are, and Drain You. You could play them all on a streaming service without ever knowing four of them are on Nevermind (three on side one, if you have it on vinyl or cassette). Listening to individual tracks has returned to the Rock n Roll time of the 50’s when the normal way to listen to music was the 7” single.
But then you have to give it some prospective. During our first few weeks at university back in the 90’s, we all watched Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs for the first time. Not available on home video we watched it at the cinema two years after its initial release. In the background of the film there is often a radio playing the fictional ‘K-Billy’ radio station and the “K-Billy’s Super Sounds of the Seventies Weekend” punctuated by the voice of the deadpan monotone of the DJ played by comedian Steven Wright. If you exclude Bedlam cover versions of Magic Carpet Ride and Harvest Moon, newest song is Stuck in the Middle with You (1973) and the oldest, Little Green Bag (1969). This would be like making a film today and featuring music from 1999 to £2004!
We are in an interesting time for music, never before has so much being so accessible. Back in the 90’s if Tarantino but a deep cut or obscure song in a movie, the only way to hear it would be to buy the soundtrack. There was very little Jazz or Metal on the radio. Rock was limited to classic rock, or the mainstream bands that made the top 40. These days, not only are there a myriad of streaming services, but with the invention of DAB radio there are also dedicated stations for genres, and decades. So next time you see a kid in a Nirvana T-shirt don’t ask them what their favourite album is, but what are their favourite songs. They may just surprise you and say something other than Smells Like Teen Spirit or Come as You Are!
Barbie is a fashion doll manufactured by American toy company Mattel, since their launch in 1959 Barbie and her male counterpart Ken have been the most popular dolls in the word. Having passed $1billion at the box-office the film based on the doll is the most popular movie in the world at the moment. Second only to, and rapidly catching The Super Mario Bros. Movie it may be the biggest movie of the year. Despite other films in their franchise banking over $1billion both Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and Fast X failed to reach the milestone. The latest Mission Impossible and Indiana Jones films also underperformed.
While the films colour pallet is almost entirely pink and filled with beautiful people, the story is far from what you would expect. Facing a personal existential crisis, Barbie’s (Margot Robbie) travels to the real world to find the human that plays with her. This allows the filmmakers, writer director, Greta Gerwig, her co-writer Noah Baumbach, and producer Margot Robbie, to hold a mirror to society. Critical of the Barbie brand’s portrayal of women and Hollywood’s recent attempts at feminism. It isn’t the most subversive film ever made, but it is making a clear political statement. So, all this is a good thing? We are going to see more woman and indie filmmakers helming big budget movies? Possibly. My concern is that studios will see it as a success of a movie passed on an already popular intellectual property (IP). We are going to be inundated with movies based on toys and video games.
The film didn’t happen by accident, various incarnations of a Barbie movie have been in development for a decade. Then Margot Robbie was approached to star, she agreed on the proviso that she would produce. Not just an actor been gifted a producer credit Robbie and Tom Ackerley, her husband/production partner took creative control through their company LuckyChap Entertainment. They hired Greta Gerwig as the screenwriter, who in turn bought her partner Noah Baumbach onboard. There are suggestions that the studio wanted to make changes to the original script, but Gerwig and Robbie held fast suggesting it was the only Barbie movie they would make.
I am not suggesting every quirky independent filmmaker should be given a near $150million budget, to make a blockbuster movie, but in a world where there isn’t much made between where only franchise movies seem to get a significant amount of money to spend, it would be good to see studios taking a chance. Especially as a few sure things have underperformed recently and the other hit of the summer is a contemplative, three hour movie, largely black and white movie mainly comprising middle age men talking in rooms!
Quentin Tarantino’s first movie Reservoir Dogs has one eye on the past. The soundtrack is littered with 70’s music, we hear snippets from a radio station “super sounds of the 70’s”, the characters talk about the past. This is something that has been a key to his career ever since, creating something original by repackaging the past. The reason it works is that he doesn’t take the best of the past, he takes the cool, and the quirky. But he doesn’t only look back, he has always had an eye on the future, or more precisely his legacy. His intention to make just ten films then retire. The idea being that the final films great directors tend to be rubbish. Given he has just celebrated his 60th birthday and is reported to be working on his final film, it seems like a good time to look back on his movies to date. What better way to do that than a ranking.
A few notes on the ranking: I have only included feature films directed by Tarantino, not films he scripted, acted in, or co-directed. I have also judged the films as they were released in the UK, Therefore, Death Proof is included as a standalone film, The Grindhouse Project is not included, Kill Bill is two separate films. Finally, and most importantly, there is no measure or metric to this ranking, it is just my preference. If you have a differ ranking feel free to share it, but remember, neither of us is right or wrong, they are just opinions.
1 – Pulp Fiction: What can I say, the film is perfect. Despite the broken timeline it all makes perfect sense and hangs together as a single piece. The casting is perfect throughout, as are the performances, but the real star is Tarantino’s script that keeps the movie moving at a perfect pace. The film has some of the best dialogue ever filmed. The two and a half hours zip past as if it were 90 minutes. It has been copied and emulated from the moment it came out. The film has no great subtext or deeper meaning, but if you are looking for that why watch a movie called Pulp Fiction?
2 – Jackie Brown: Probably the best plot of any Tarantino movie, but it isn’t his! Based on the novel Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard, the director adapted it himself and injected his own style, swagger, and dialogue. The cast is amazing throughout, but Pam Grier totally owns it. It is a film that tends to divide opinion but is probably the most accessible Tarantino movie and one that people who are lukewarm on his more indulgent projects should still enjoy.
3 – Reservoir Dogs: I was 16 when the movie came out, I first saw it at the cinema two years later (it took another year before it got a video release), I have seen every subsequent film on release at the cinema. The genius of the film is the twist on convention, it is heist movie that doesn’t show the heist. There isn’t much plot, it’s all about the characters, their relationships, and interactions. These encounters are accentuated by Tarantino’s unique dialogue. The other key to the brilliance is the casting.
4 – Kill Bill Vol. 1: Remember Pulp Fiction? Uma Thurman plays an actress whose biggest role came in a TV pilot that didn’t get picked up. Her character was from a group of female assassins, sound familiar. The story goes that she pitched the idea of The Bride on the set of Pulp Fiction. The fact that it is in the script suggests Fox Force Five predates The Bride, even so the characters and the idea are credited to both Turman and Tarantino. Objectively some of the films on the list are better than this, but the film is so much fun, it is just dripping with style, the soundtrack is amazing, and one of the chapters is breathtaking: Show Down at House of Blue Leaves!
5 – Once Upon a Time in Hollywood: I was really concerned when Once Upon a Time in Hollywood was announced. Firstly, we don’t need another movie about Charles Manson, but more significantly, is Quentin Tarantino capable of the sensitivity needed to tell the story of the horrendous murder of actress Sharon Tate? My fears were exacerbated by the fact I didn’t particularly enjoy his last film, The Hateful Eight (spoiler, its bottom of this ranking). I needn’t have worried, the film is an absolute blast and a true return to form. Taken on its own merits it is a fun, and often funny film that somewhat recaptures my favourite of his films, Pulp Fiction. It is also a fitting love letter to Hollywood as a whole, and the birth of New Hollywood. A director who has always had an eye on late 60’s, and 1970’s cinema, he has finally visited the era, and it was a rich and rewarding trip. The film has its issues, but they are easily forgotten simply because they are outweighed by everything else that is so good. Not Tarantino’s masterpiece but an accomplished work and for only the second or third time in his career, he isn’t just entertaining us, he has something to say.
6 – Inglourious Basterds: The last line of Inglourious Basterds is. “This might just be my masterpiece.” It may just be that! Bringing together all the elements of his previous films but giving them a bit more depth despite the apparent brevity he brings to a serious subject. It also has something that Tarantino is never normally accused of. He is commenting on the way movies rewrite history, and people take this fiction as truth. It’s a film I appreciate a little more with every rewatch.
7 – Kill Bill Vol. 2: The to Kill Bill movies should have been one, but it was too long and Tarantino wouldn’t cut it down. The story from the first film unfolds and is revealed here. Still excellent, just not as much fun as the first movie.
8 – Death Proof: Originally intended as part of Grindhouse, a double feature of Death Proof and Robert Rodriguez’s Planet Terror. When Grindhouse underperformed at the US box office the two films were released separately in some territories including here in the UK. At nearly two hours, it plays in a slightly extended cut from the Grindhouse version. It is still made to look like a Grindhouse movie with two connected stories put together in a perfect disjointed way as if they were two features edited down and cut together for a fleapit or drive-in. The first half of the movie is dialogue heavy; the second part is all action. Both are filled with countless movie references including a lot of 70’s car movies. Not his best movie but a hell of a lot of fun.
9 – Django Unchained: I like this movie, but I have only watched it a couple of times. The main issue is that it is unnecessarily long to the point of being self-indulgent, not as much so as the movie below, but still self-indulgent. There is a scene some way into the film were Jamie Foxx’ Django meets a character played by Franco Nero, the eponymous anti-hero of Sergio Corbucci’s 1966 Spaghetti Western Django. This just makes me think, I would rather be watching that film.
10 – The Hateful Eight: This is the film where Tarantino lost me. He has made no secret of the fact Rio Bravo is one of his favorite films. For all its action, most of the film consists of a group of people sitting in a room talking. Was he trying to remake that? It has some great moments, but they are so spread out. An unnecessarily long film that adds nothing to the genre or the director’s catalogue.
Having declared last month that I was going to return to my movie of the month segment I have fallen somewhat behind. We are two thirds of the way through March, and I am yet to report on February. I only actually made four trips to the cinema throughout the month, but don’t feel I missed out on much.
Knock at the Cabin – When you mention M. Night Shyamalan the first thing people think about is plot twists, it is a lazy shorthand I am guilty of too. My favourite of his films is the one where I didn’t see the twist coming, Unbreakable (2000). On the other hand, I saw the twist a mile off in his beloved masterpiece The Sixth Sense (1999) and have never really liked the movie. Would I have liked it more had I not worked out the twist? Maybe! While there are many twists in his movies, that isn’t all they are about, Knock at the Cabin is no exception, and is one of the better films in a very up and down career.
Based on The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul Tremblay but with a significantly changed end that also changed the meaning. A seven-year-old child, Wen and her parents Eric and Andrew are on holiday, staying in a cabin in the woods (nothing bad ever happens in a movie set in a cabin in the woods, does it?). They are confronted by a quartet of home invaders led by Leonard, brilliantly portrayed by Dave Bautista. Leonard is calm, polite and softly spoken to the point of menace! He explains the great sacrifice they must make for the good of humanity. What follows is a tense and well measured thriller that unfolds rather than containing any massive twists. While the story is laced with religion and theology, it could easily be read as an allegory for climate change with the message that there is hope, but only with sacrifice. All things considered, a film I enjoyed a lot more than I expected to.
The Whale – Brendan Fraser has recently won the best actor Oscar for this movie where he portrays Charlie, a many who is terminally ill from the effects of his obesity. He wants to reconnect with his estranged daughter played by Sadie Sink who is also excellent playing a truly horrible person. There is fantastic performances from supporting characters played by Hong Chau, and Samantha Morton.
The single location set is effective in demonstrating the prison Charlie has created for himself, but it also betrays the movies theatrical origin. The refences to Moby Dick throughout the film remind us of director Darren Aronofsky’s disinterest in subtlety, but again it works. What Aronofsky is brilliant at is taking an ordinary character and pushing to the extremes of their actions. The film seems to be telling people they can have faith without religion. While the film does get bogged down in its own theology (not sure I have ever used that word on this blog before, now I have used it twice in one article!) it is lifted greatly by the good pacing and great acting.
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantomania – The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) hardly put a foot wrong with twenty-three films in eleven years split into three phases collectively known as “The Infinity Saga”. Then came Phase Four, the start of a new series of films, “The Multiverse Saga”. Phase Four is made up of seven distinctly average movies that failed to live up to what went before, Phase Five is the time to get back on track, and Quantomania needs to be the film to do it. It is after all the film that was going to introduce the villain for the rest of the Saga (well sort of).
The plot for what it’s worth involves Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) and his Ant-family get sucked into the quantum realm, which turns out to be very different to what we had been led to believe from Janet van Dyne (Michelle Pfeiffer). The film leans into its weirdness which is good, but the story is very dull and lightweight. As with the two previous Ant-Man movies Evangeline Lilly as Hope van Dyne / Wasp is given nothing to do. On a positive note, Jonathan Majors as Kang the Conqueror makes in interesting villain.
Woman Talking – You would be forgiven for thinking Woman Talking was based on a play, its limited locations and long speeches certainly give that impression. It is actually adapted from a 2018 novel (of the same name) by Miriam Toews. The visuals would also make you think it was set a long time in the past, unlit it becomes clear it is set in the very recent past. The most shocking revelation is that it is inspired by a true story.
The film centres on a group of who have to decide what to do following the revelation that a group of men within their community have been drugging and raping the woman. The main issue they face is that they live within an isolated Mennonite colony. The woman have little to no education, cannot read or write, and have never evens seen a map of the area surrounding where they live. Most significantly they have the huge spectre of religious dogma clouding an rational ability to make a decision.
The second Oscar winning movie in this month’s roundup, writer/director Sarah Polley won this years award for adapted screenplay. This is well deserved as the screenplay is fantastic, not just because it is a dialogue heavy story, but also for the structure it gives the film, keeping it interesting, and not repetitive. The strongest thing about the film is the acting from a fantastic, mainly female ensemble cast, the standouts are Claire Foy, Jessie Buckley, and Rooney Mara.
A clear and easy movie of the month winner: Woman Talking
Fandango Groovers Movie Blog 