Remember back when Gladiator (2000) was advertised as a cheap thrill ride, complete with quick cuts of Russell Crowe kicking ass while Kid Rock’s “Bawitdaba” blared under the action? Don’t take my word for it:
Anyway, I’m glad it was more substantive than that. Of particular note: this thing just looks spectacular. There are a couple of stray bad-looking but mercifully quick shots of CGI tigers, but otherwise it’s just a joy to look at for the full runtime. It’s not an altogether perfect movie, but it’s excellent and holds up really well 24 years later. I was way overdue for this rewatch.
A sci-fi banger romance. I’m not aware of a film that uses dream sequences that effectively as opposed to cheap plot devices. (Not counting stuff like Tarkovsky)
I vacillate between this and the Matrix being the greatest sci-fi idea of all time.
*Changing my movie everyman to Tom Wilkinson. Fuck death.
On the off chance that you haven’t seen In the Bedroom: see it. I just always get paranoid that too many people haven’t seen that one. Top-tier Wilkinson. It can be seen ad-supported with Pluto or ad-free if you have Hoopla through a library card.
They are. The makers of the adaptation sold their rights to the studio, that’s all the story is. Happily, they took the non-Netflix offer to get it into theaters.
They don’t. There were some cases about Zorro (he’s an old book character) where like the movie sued the play or something and lost, after making money for years off threats against others for licenses. It can still be a factual question whether something is based on a movie and not a book, but ain’t gonna win with a jury absent a smoking gun. It’s probably some weird Hollywood issue or there’s some existing IP like a script.
edit: Rereading the tweet, it looks like they bought the rights to release a new movie that’s been made. That’s of course its own IP. Why sell the rights to release? I assume because people who make movies do not know how to release, promote, and monetize them.
I went into this one blinder than usual. Ralph Fiennes plus awards buzz means I’m watching. I knew it had a religious setting, but nothing else; I didn’t even know I was going to be treated to a Stanley Tucci supporting role. Thanks to a tone set really well by stellar cinematography and sound design, I was transfixed from the jump and stayed very invested the whole way.
My mind will remain open as other lead acting performances roll in over the next couple of months, but Ralph Fiennes set a high bar here and became my early rooting interest for a Best Actor Oscar. It was a beautifully nuanced performance, with some instances that required him to go big, but also a lot of internalized acting that he pulled off incredibly well. And as long as I’ve brought up Tucci: great stuff from him as well. I loved the acting across the board in this.
The ending…might jam me up a little bit. I’m not sure. I loved the rest of the movie so much that I’ll be happy to be talked into it, but my initial reaction was mixed at best. Even if I remain iffy on the choice for a conclusion, there’s way too much great stuff here not to give it good marks. This marks a new entry into my ongoing top five of 2024.
Lanthimos is trying his best to make me hate Emma Stone, just like David O Russell did with Jlawok. My god what an awful movie, just like that babby’s first feminist movie before.
1,5/5 (that 0,5 is for Plemons’ performance in the first third)
