The Little Princess
Stowaway
The Little Colonel
I don’t particularly like kids. I don’t want any of my own and other people’s generally annoy me. I can’t imagine I’d like Shirley Temples movies, right? I’d only seen her in the Batchelor and The Bobbysoxer but that’s when she was grown up, as a daft kid though….?
Turns out they’re fucking magical! There’s a general theme of her being an orphan, wandering into the lives of random adults and making everyone’s lives better. She’s like the human version of lassie. Through the modern lens it’s terrifying watching her meet a random man and jump into his car but if you get out of that shitty mindset and roll with it it’s just so terribly wholesome, funny and damn is she an impressive little lassie! Her dancing is impressive, her singing is… good enough and her acting is solid. Really she has 3 modes; grinning at the wonders of the world, big wet sad puppy dog eyes and mischievous eyebrows - but she uses those tools so well! I really hope her mum didn’t put her through hell for these results but I wouldn’t bet against it :/
The little colonel was apparently the first black man dancing with a white girl on screen. Stowaway is surprisingly respectful to Chinese people. It’s kind of amazing for America’s darling in the 1930s really.
On A Clear Day You Can See Forever
Streisand can recall her past lives and also has ESP. She seeks help from a hypnotherapist and things get a bit silly. I really liked it but there’s musical numbers that just don’t fit and as great as Babs voice is it would have been much better without them. Pretty good overall, quite original too.
I Just Watched (Films)
Re: I Just Watched (Films)
A man who could tell more truth and eat fewer pies.
Re: I Just Watched (Films)
Oppenheimer
I think this could have been good if it was just slower. Very few moments had any impact because I was so busy concentrating trying to keep up with the absolutely relentless pace of scene changes. I reckon two thirds of them have to be fewer than 15 seconds long, and they bounce all over chronologically. It's not done deliberately to confuse you like some productions that use that style of presentation, you can mostly tell when each one is supposed to be set, but to me it stinks of someone that couldn't get a dramatic story out of the actual order of events. I also really didn't rate the choice of using practical effects to represent the Trinity Test - for someone used to the terrifying awe of actual nuclear detonations, these just did not convey the same impact, and I'm someone that usually much prefers practical effects to CG ones. Nuclear detonations have a pretty unique look to them, and I don't think you can convey that through conventional explosion effects and still have it look convincing.
And for a three hour film, I found it a bit odd that they don't really give you the proper sense of context for half of the stuff going on. I do have a vague understanding of the McCarthy-era witch hunts, so it wasn't totally lost on me, but the film seems to expect me to know who Strauss is, otherwise he just comes across as a petty arsehole - it's only after I went on a bit of a wiki binge afterwards that I put the pieces together, and while I don't necessarily hate that idea (I have no objections to enlightening myself on a subject afterwards), I couldn't help being a bit bored in the latter third of the film. They could have devoted more of the run time to contextual exposition, there was certainly enough of it to do so.
I think it's probably a 4/10. The subject matter ought to have been fascinating, but I just didn't think much of the presentation.
I think this could have been good if it was just slower. Very few moments had any impact because I was so busy concentrating trying to keep up with the absolutely relentless pace of scene changes. I reckon two thirds of them have to be fewer than 15 seconds long, and they bounce all over chronologically. It's not done deliberately to confuse you like some productions that use that style of presentation, you can mostly tell when each one is supposed to be set, but to me it stinks of someone that couldn't get a dramatic story out of the actual order of events. I also really didn't rate the choice of using practical effects to represent the Trinity Test - for someone used to the terrifying awe of actual nuclear detonations, these just did not convey the same impact, and I'm someone that usually much prefers practical effects to CG ones. Nuclear detonations have a pretty unique look to them, and I don't think you can convey that through conventional explosion effects and still have it look convincing.
And for a three hour film, I found it a bit odd that they don't really give you the proper sense of context for half of the stuff going on. I do have a vague understanding of the McCarthy-era witch hunts, so it wasn't totally lost on me, but the film seems to expect me to know who Strauss is, otherwise he just comes across as a petty arsehole - it's only after I went on a bit of a wiki binge afterwards that I put the pieces together, and while I don't necessarily hate that idea (I have no objections to enlightening myself on a subject afterwards), I couldn't help being a bit bored in the latter third of the film. They could have devoted more of the run time to contextual exposition, there was certainly enough of it to do so.
I think it's probably a 4/10. The subject matter ought to have been fascinating, but I just didn't think much of the presentation.
Re: I Just Watched (Films)
Heretic
Superb first half, average second half with a somewhat disappointing ending as I don't think it delivers on what it was building up to. Hugh Grant's performance is exceptional, though, and elevates the film quite a few notches.
8/10 on a first watch, but I think it'll likely be 6/10 on a future watch.
Superb first half, average second half with a somewhat disappointing ending as I don't think it delivers on what it was building up to. Hugh Grant's performance is exceptional, though, and elevates the film quite a few notches.
Spoiler
8/10 on a first watch, but I think it'll likely be 6/10 on a future watch.
Re: I Just Watched (Films)
Last night, randomly browsing Netflix looking for a decent film, ending up on The Life of Chuck, and really enjoyed it!
Not entirely sure why I'd never heard of it before, written by Stephen King and directed by Mike Flanagan, which would usually put it immediately on my radar. Didn't really know what to expect, but even though I'd figured out what was going on by the end of the film's first act (and tbf, I don't think it's intended as a final plot twist or anything) I was consistently engaged and charmed throughout the rest.
One of those that has me still thinking about it a day later, good stuff.
Not entirely sure why I'd never heard of it before, written by Stephen King and directed by Mike Flanagan, which would usually put it immediately on my radar. Didn't really know what to expect, but even though I'd figured out what was going on by the end of the film's first act (and tbf, I don't think it's intended as a final plot twist or anything) I was consistently engaged and charmed throughout the rest.
One of those that has me still thinking about it a day later, good stuff.
I have a Youtube channel now! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6kVsr ... Q/featured