December 2024 Watch

Thursday, 9 January 2024

Honestly I’m so glad I finally got the chance to post this… I knew from early on in December that I was only going to post once for the month because I was so busy with school, but then with travel and two bouts of sickness, I ended up being very late with it. Ah, well! At least I finished something eventually.

The Fall (2006, dir. Tarsem Singh)

This film has been on my list for years, just because of the gorgeous stills I’ve seen from it, and I have to say I’m so glad I finally sat down to watch it. This film did not perform well during its release, but I have only ever seen people speak fondly about it, and I can see why.

The Fall follows Alexandria, a young girl with a broken arm who is currently staying in a hospital. While there, she meets fellow patient Roy, who has been injured completing a stunt for a film. In return for acquiring him morphine in a plan to die by suicide, Roy tells Alexandria an epic, fantastical tale about heroes in seek of vengeance toward the ruler Governor Odious.

The obvious draw of this movie is the absolutely stunning visuals, which do not disappoint. The bold colors and distinct visual language make both the fantasy world and the hospital feel so rich, in entirely different ways. The world is so expansive, and the production proves why—the film was shot in over twenty locations over the course of several years. So much detail and thought was put into these locations, like buildings in Jodhpur being painted blue to depict the blue city in the story. And I cannot stress enough: this sort of dedication really shows. This article highlights some of the production choices and obstacles that came up before the film was rereleased in 4K in September of this year.

In line with the visuals are the incredible costumes by Eiko Ishioka. I’m familiar with her work from Bram Stoker’s Dracula (a beautiful movie I can’t watch without feeling nauseated due to the editing style, but I adore the costumes from regardless) and Mirror Mirror (a formative movie for me in that it helped me to realize the possibilities for and role of costumes in filmmaking). The costumes are so distinct and, frankly, gorgeous. Despite the idiosyncrasy of each one, they never feel out of place or overwhelming; instead they add to this sense of whimsy and artifice otherwise complemented through the storytelling motif.

That the aspects of production were so carefully considered, so that every element worked together to tell the story, was so great to see. The world becomes a fantastical, storytold thing through the literal framework of the story that Roy tells Alexandria. This motif or frame is so ubiquitous in film, and while it’s often done well, this film does it amazing. There are these sudden changes in the dialogue of Roy’s tale, and occasional interjections by either character, that demonstrate their surrounding conversation. Moments occur where Alexandria’s imagining of the epic’s events clearly differ from the story Roy is telling, and you can visibly see this disparity that gives such strong characterization to both.

This focus on perspective is further assisted by the unique position Alexandria occupies in the hospital as a child who is learning English. One particular technique I adored was when she sits between two conversations and we get to hear both at once. It reflects this place only a child can occupy, where she doesn’t seem particularly interested in either set of adults talking, but sticking with her perspective in these moments is so revealing to the audience at the same time it creates such a distinct sense.

The childlike perspective in the hospital and fantastical imagined world don’t take away from the more serious subject matter, in fact allowing them to exist more subtly but never unacknowledged. It strikes a perfect balance between the point of view the movie takes on and its subject matter, treating it in a way that never feels heavy-handed or tonally disparate. There is a point at the end of the movie where some people are watching the film with Roy’s stunt in the hospital and it’s so captivating how you’re seeing and hearing people critique it, people barely pay attention, and at the same time, people enraptured by it.

This movie is so grand—there’s really no other way I can describe it. It feels huge, epic, and imaginative, at the same time that it feels grounded. The doubled story surely contributes to this, but the use of visuals to complement that choice are resolute in their strength. It is truly a beautiful movie in every way, and if you’re looking for something a little sad, and a little fantastic, this is the film for you.

Longlegs (2024, dir. Oz Perkins)

I need to stop watching movies people say are really good, I think, because I keep winding up disappointed. That being said, watching this movie helped me come to a useful conclusion about my taste in movies that was tested again later in the month. I have to give it props for that at least.

Longlegs follows Agent Lee Harker of the FBI, who is investigating a series of family annihilation cases that seem to be connected. There are occult ties to this process that Harker has unique access to, and it is implied this comes from a personal run-in with the killer known as Longlegs.

Obviously the standout element of this film was the great ambience and distinct sense of style. The uncanniness of the performances and careful cultivation of sets were well-highlighted by the music, formatting, and cinematography, which were all also stellar in and of their own right. And yet… I found myself somewhat bored by it. From what I understand of Perkins’ other work, this film seems to fit stylistically, but there was something about it I found myself at a distance from. And to some extent I think this was possibly intentional, but not a choice I personally liked. This sort of slow, sterile horror ambience is definitely captivating, but I grow wary of it the more I see. I don’t want to shut out this style entirely by any means, but I need to break it up with higher energy and more campy films in between.

Aside from this, the movie clearly had some thoughts on various topics, namely American nationalism, that I think would’ve been really interesting to explore, had it anything tangible to say about it. There was this returning motif of framed presidential photographs that served to express a specific time period in both flashbacks and the “current” (1990s) timeline, and to some extent to characterize the places they inhabited and people that reflected, but ultimately it just felt like a neat idea without any substantial point behind it. It’s totally possible it just went over my head, but I was disappointed by it. I read one review of it that suggested it created a “childlike, exaggerated sense of the decade,” and while I agree with that to some extent, I think the film is trying to do more. Yes, it’s a very direct and obvious way to depict time, but at the same time, the same motif being seen in a FBI office and a personal home seems worthy of consideration. If we also consider the context of the 1990s period piece conflated with the idea of the Satanic Panic, the film seems to want to discuss this moment but also refuses to do so. Or perhaps my expectations for the movie are in conflict with what it truly desires to do.

As for what this movie helped me to realize: for a while I have said I’m not a fan of supernatural-based horror when I should more specifically direct my ire towards satanic horror. Which is the primary source of disinterest in this movie. It’s just not a subgenre that appeals to me in any way and I struggle with it conceptually. It is so entrenched in specific religious and cultural context that I cannot personally relate to enough to be interested, much less scared by. As well, the broad “good” versus “evil” ideas don’t create a narrative that is particularly engaging to me.

In the end, I don’t have any particular criticisms to weigh against this movie. It is technically well made, and I’ve mentioned my interest in the stylistic elements, but it just isn’t a story that captures my attention. Purely in terms of premise, I find it a compelling plot, but the satanic angle mixed with the slow procedural format meant that I was bored most of its duration.

My Best Friend’s Exorcism (2022, dir. Damon Thomas)

If you clicked on the link in my above response, you may have noticed that this movie was referenced in the discussion of the genre the author refers to as “Satanwave.” I was drawn to watching it because despite my realizations about satanic horror, I tend to enjoy Grady Hendrix (the author of the book this movie was based on), who does occasionally veer into this type of horror. I wanted to take a moment to consider my conclusions and where the limits of that dislike are.

My Best Friend’s Exorcism follows high schoolers and best friends, Abby and Gretchen. They venture to a friend’s lakehouse one night and try LSD, during which Gretchen becomes possessed by a demonic entity. Gretchen’s possession takes a few different forms over its course, but Abby eventually decides to attempt an exorcism with the help of Christian Lemon, the youngest in a trio of Christian bodybuilder brothers who dabble in such things. Christian abandons Abby and Gretchen in the climax of the movie, and Abby completes the exorcism of herself, saving her best friend before she moves away from their hometown.

The thing that took the most getting used to in this film was its uncanniness. The acting and speaking style are so particular, and while I can’t quite decide if I like it or not, it certainly stood out. The entire of the ambience of the movie was this way, although I wouldn’t exactly say it evoked any particular feelings; unfortunately or not, this also includes the time period.

I struggle to divorce this response from my knowledge of the book, because it was a fairly faithful adaptation, in that while it left a lot out due to the runtime, it was fairly uninventive in retelling the events in a fresh or creative way. In fact, I would go so far as to argue that the adaptation meant that many moments fell flat, from the emotional core between the characters to the particular scares. There is one scene from the book I always think of when I think of horrifying scenes, but in the movie it was done with a CGI creature that, for all it might’ve tried to frighten, lacked the grotesque presence of the original.

More than that, though, it lacked the identity of the characters in a way I thought was unfortunate. The movie reduced larger questions of class, gender, and race to relatively small points, even when they were major elements of the plot. One of the strongest parts of Hendrix’s writing is his ability to make these elements deeply important to the character’s personalities, choices, and situations, as well as the plots themselves. That was entirely lacking in this film.

Because of this lackluster beats in the rest of the film, I was not surprised by the emotional climax of the movie falling flat. I hate to say it, but the entire end of the movie had me wishing for the end of the book, which is genuinely such a strong bit of writing from Hendrix. That the performances and script could not deliver is just the cherry on top of an all right movie. Ultimately, I think what they chose to do was actually fine because nothing was ever going to top those two incredibly beautiful gorgeous moving passages, or even come close.

This movie was not great, and I would recommend the book over it every time, but it was serviceable for a chill night. It’s maybe something to watch if you’d like something to poke fun at with friends.

Ella Enchanted (2004, dir. Tommy O'Haver)

I watched this movie for the hundredth time in December and just like every time before, it was amazing. I think this is a brilliant film and utterly charming in every aspect.

Ella Enchanted follows the titular character, Ella of Frell, a young woman cursed as a baby with the gift of obedience, meaning she must follow every command she is given. Once her father remarries and suddenly Ella has a new stepmother and two stepsisters, Ella journeys to find her fairy godmother and reverse the gift she was given so many years ago. Along the way, she runs into the prince, and they and a band of misfits go to the castle. While there, the prince’s power-hungry uncle commands Ella to kill the prince before his coronation. She tries to run, begs her fairy godmother to take back the gift, but eventually must find out how to do so herself.

The main reason I watch this movie is the utterly gorgeous costumes. These are like medieval fantasy garbs combined with Y2K silhouettes, styles, and colors. They are genuinely so fun and creative and allow the movie to be visually unlike anything else I have seen. The costumes are complemented by the worldbuilding, from the community college Ella attends to the hand-cranked escalator in the mall she frequents. It is visually relatively simplistic and yet so charming at the same time.

As one can likely glean from the summary, this plot is inspired by Cinderella, although Ella’s journey takes up a considerable portion of the runtime. In general, this is not a plot that I find particularly engaging, but this film does everything to make it work really well. It departs from the source material as needed to keep it different, but draws on familiar fairy tale tropes in a vaguely ironic way to keep it straightforward.

Perhaps this is best exemplified in how seriously the movie takes the activism and political landscape. Ella’s beliefs are never ridiculed by the movie itself, even if they are by other characters to demonstrate their beliefs, and she never grows out of them, a common occurrence in similar romcom characters. Similarly, Char’s development occurs as he sees injustice in the kingdom he is meant to rule, as opposed to being instructed by a kind, wise woman he is in love with (a trope I really don’t like). These small changes mean that while the movie is occasionally sarcastic about its fairy tale genre, it does something really refreshing with the romcom aspect of it.

I won’t act like this movie is anything aside from a family movie, and while it does take its activist characters and their arcs seriously, it is appropriately (in terms of audience) simplistic in those endeavors. But it is a fun watch that feels refreshing if you’re used to fairy tales or romcoms and looking for something the same, but a little different.

Carry On (2024, dir. Jaume Collet-Serra)

In general, I like to go into movies with little idea of what they are about, but it’s times like this when I really have to question that behavior. I anticipated this being some kind of heist movie that took place on a plane, but it is fully a TSA propaganda piece. That’s honestly the best way to describe it. I would not have watched this movie had I known what it is, but I didn’t and so now I’m reviewing it.

Carry On follows Ethan, a soon-to-be father, want-to-be police officer, and current (read: experiencing a lack of promotions) TSA agent at LAX. Wanting to provide for his coming child and prove to his girlfriend his dedication to his job, he asks for a promotion. Denied the promotion but given an opportunity, he spends his shift on the belt, during which he is contacted by a mysterious voice demanding he let through a specific passenger with a specific suitcase. A good sum of the movie is him attempting to outsmart the voice and his companions, but the final act shits more into a typical action flick.

This movie is incredibly on the nose in all aspects—in the character dynamics and arcs, in the jokes, in the plot, in its themes. At one point, there is a montage of people’s complaints while getting screened by TSA and it is so transparently drawn from criticisms you can find of TSA online in a way that just wants to make fun of the speakers without engaging with those ideas at all. During one of these complaints, when a man insists that Ethan’s job is a joke, a line of men in military formal dress are watching and interjecting in the conversation with what can only be understood as one of the lessons of the movie. The character arcs and traits are of a similar straightforwardness, with little complexity demanded of them or the audience at any point. I felt my eyes glazing over every time I heard the mysterious voice/figure say, “I am in control and you are not.” I promise—we can understand the very basic beats of this movie.

More than that, though, the film is blatant about its fears of terrorism, biological warfare, and people from other countries. There is a brief moment that might be considered a reversal of this at the end, but it’s so brief that it doesn’t really make up for an entire runtime that banks on these fears. Like, you can say what you want at the end, but if a good portion of the audience is yelling to “just shoot this guy” for half the film, any message you wanted to send is basically void. And I’m not even convinced this is what they wanted to do, because when I say this moment was “brief,” I mean it was no more than two very glossed-over lines. But if you’re worried about the politics of this movie being iffy at best, worry no longer—one of the people being blackmailed has a husband! That’s right, the TSA propaganda movie is inclusive. Fears assuaged.

In terms of the positives of this movie, I think the simplicity of the plot did what the filmmakers wanted it to do. The movie was well-paced and had a good sense of tension. It made ample use of Chekov’s gun in that every single element came back into play. Which sounds like it should be a compliment, but I actually found dissatisfying. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but suffice to say it felt more contrived than detail-oriented.

Will this movie make me start doing more research into the films I watch beforehand? It’s unlikely. But perhaps I can warn someone of my same mistakes. Also, I had no place to mention this earlier because it’s essentially irrelevant to the plot, but this is a Christmas movie.

Freaky (2020, dir. Christopher Landon)

I said in my first November response that there was only one exception on my list of these slasher remakes of other iconic movies to my claim that these aren’t the best type of movie, however much I like them. At the time, I was referring to Happy Death Day, but I take it back because there are two exceptions. Add to the list 2020’s Freaky.

Freaky follows high schooler Millie, who deals with bullying and the recent death of her father. A group of her peers are murdered by a local urban legend serial killer, The Butcher, who soon turns his sights on Millie. After stabbing her with an ancient blade, the two switch bodies. In Millie’s body, The Butcher goes after various students, teachers, and townsfolk; meanwhile, in the killer’s body, Millie and her friends try to switch the bodies back before the change becomes permanent.

This movie makes excellent use of its concept. It’s mainly funny, although there are definitely ample slasher elements. I suppose it’s more of a campy sense of humor, though I would argue only slightly—this I only realized as the people I was watching with seemed shocked at the way some of the humor and scares played out. It’s a little wacky, and while it feels dated, I was very charmed by it once again.

The performances are really what make this movie. I struggle with a way to describe it more earnestly than, “fun!,” a quality I find important and captivating in a film. I was compelled by both the humor and the emotional journey of the main character. While this did mean that the side characters were comparatively flat, I never felt they were boring or lifeless. I’ll also say something potentially controversial, which is that I don’t find myself wanting for character development in every single story. This film definitely had it in the main character Millie, but it really leans into its genre by making the plot the center of the story.

In a similar vein, it very much follows the tropes of its genre and subgenre, and because I love slasher horror movies, this to me is lovely. While retaining all the markers of a strong slasher, it retains the ability to move through genre fluidly, with an (admittedly straightforward) emotional center and comedic style. It by no means holds back on the gore despite the light tone, and integrates the kills into the comedy well.

This is a really fun movie! It’s silly, it’s gross, and it’s simplistic in a way that really works. If you’re looking for something funny but a little scary, this movie is just the thing.