PREVIEW: Dave

This Hulu show is based on the life of 20-something-year-old Dave Burd, a semi-famous youtube rapper (aka Lil Dicky). Dave is constantly trying to get big in the rap world, but finds a lot of derailments and problems in his personal life. The show is inappropriate and pretty embarrassing, but absolutely hilarious, with lots of famous guest stars including Justin Bieber and Macklemore. The show began on March 4th, and the season finale is April 29th. Recommended for fans of Big Mouth, Sex Education, and, of course, Lil Dicky himself.  Watch here:

https://www.hulu.com/series/dave-ac3a96f0-9614-46af-b524-f59c7d281946

 

REVIEW: The Killing of a Sacred Deer

I always try to go into movies (and, well, most other events in my life) completely blind–I hate to watch trailers or read plots; just knowing basic facts ahead of time, like which actors are in the cast, upsets me. This has become a self-enforced law in virtually all areas of my life. So it wasn’t until a few minutes in that I realized that Colin Farrell, the very man who enchanted me in The Lobster played a main character (I found out later that the director was also the same in both movies). Exactly what I didn’t want to happen happened then: based on this new knowledge gained early in the movie, I began forming expectations. When I first watched The Lobster last year, alone in my dorm room in early spring just before the sun went down, I was floored. After it ended, I walked outside and hung onto a stop sign to keep from blowing away, though the air was still.

The result of comparisons like these is almost always disappointment. To regard a piece only as a continuation of a body of work, rather than its own autonomous thing which works in cooperation with itself, is a mistake that typically cannot be undone. This is probably why I didn’t exit my house at the end to clutch at a telephone pole or something. In fact, I forgot how it made me feel almost directly after, which is completely different from my relationship with other movies. 

Still, at some parts I was taken back to the old feeling, that sick gut high-pitched thing stuck somewhere in a nasal or orbital cavity when your mind bends a little painfully. I got this towards the end, as the children begin competing to be spared. Nothing else was starkly shocking in the same way. Not when Steven forces donuts down his son’s throat, or Anna flatly suggests it’s only rational to kill one of the children. When nothing really strikes, there is nothing to grab onto, nothing that connects us to the story.

Nicole Kidman, despite her brilliance in drama, was out of place in this movie. She thrives in hard-hitting, emotional film, not parts where she needs to seem totally unfeeling. Similarly, the presence of Alicia Silverstone got my goat at first, until I separated her from her Clueless days: as she’s grown up, her glazed-eye stare has shifted from strangely flirtatious boredom to something closer to slightly-conscious paralysis. The way her face moves can be disconcerting, bringing about an inexplicable sense of panic in my chest. And all three of the kids were perfect for this kind of acting, as all children are.

It was also clear the crew put thought into how they played with lighting. Much of the time, scenes were engulfed in golden light, sometimes artificial, but warm all the same. Maybe it was just the presence of Kidman, but it gave me some Eyes Wide Shut sensations. Rather than acting as a contrast to the coldness of the characters, it invited me into readily accepting the social norms of the world Lanthimos creates.

The movie wasn’t bad, but it was forgettable. Instead of still thinking of the questions it raises (it is morally wrong to have a favorite child? Who is most responsible in medical malpractice situations? What kinds of guilt can we handle, and how much?), I’m just flashing back to Martin messily eating spaghetti with a white shirt on. Unfortunate, maybe, but it’s the truth.

 

REVIEW: I Am Not Okay With This

Despite a general acceptance of non-heterosexuality in modern media and society, queer characters are often placed in plots that are only focused on their ~journey of self-discovery~ or in supporting roles that stereotype and tokenize them. So often, they are reduced to their sexuality, communicating to the audience that this is the only part of their identity worth mentioning. Surely, it’s important to feature queer characters in media, but every story can’t only be about their struggles with unaccepting parents/religion/schoolmates/colleagues/whatever. We normalize queerness by incorporating it in media in a wide variety of ways. 

So I was overjoyed to find that this series has a queer star who spends some time recognizing her sexuality, but is primarily preoccupied with a full storyline about her new mind powers and their possible connection to her late father.

Based on Charles Forsman’s comic of the same name, the series honors the original work, often taking sections of text into the script verbatim. I’d say that the writers could have taken some more liberty with dialogue, which could be lacking in originality sometimes. The media move from comic to television necessitates this; while comics with a minimalist art style depend on fast-paced conversation between characters to drive the story, live action dialogue is generally less important. Makers of television are freer to insert some more artistry in angles, lighting, wardrobe, delivery and content of lines. 

A lot of talented people worked on the series: people responsible for Stranger Things and The End of the F***ing World, actors who starred in the updated version of IT. But if I know anything about logical principles, I know that past performance is not indicative of future results. I Am Not Okay With This is an unfortunate piece of evidence for that rule.

Along with the lacking dialogue, there were too many illusions to late 20th century pop culture, like The Breakfast Club-esque episode and the constant Carrie references. While I understand the the entire plot is literally another reboot of that classic Stephen King story, they could have strayed a little farther, style-wise. The spring fling dress is even similar to the one Sissy Spacek wears in the original movie, pale pink satin with spaghetti straps. She does the whole walking home from the dance in the middle of the road covered in blood thing, and she doesn’t add to it. If you’re going to pull so directly from classic works, you need to do something that differentiates it from the original, pushing it farther, bringing into modern times so it can be understood within current social politics.

It’s sad when the arc of creativity starts to decline for previously awed artists. This feels like the desperate reaction to writer’s block that should’ve been given some more time to simmer. Still, most folks are wont to continuously seek out media that gives them the same kind of satisfaction as they’ve experienced in the past. So, at this psychological level, the series does a great job. Though that feels like some kind of exploitation, it fills a demand. I’m not sure I’d call it art, though.

 

REVIEW: It Comes At Night

Why is legitimate talent wasted on awful screenplays?

Chuckling a little to myself, I chose thriller about a mysterious disease that forced families to isolate themselves from outsiders. I figured I’d finally be on the edge of my seat after weeks of watching painfully monotonous news coverage of minutely different facets of the same story. Turns out I was in for the same kind of boredom I had grown accustomed to in the past couple of months.

Horror movies (and increasingly, even the most confidently-labeled “cerebral” thrillers) have long been a genre that works with the same materials to build a plot. They use the same monsters, the same dialogue, the same archetypal characters. It is so dreadfully rare to find a horror movie that doesn’t settle for mining the same types of basic fears assumed to be common to all human beings. Sure, writers could start there for some aspects of their work, but all too often they also refuse to go further.  The next time I see another humanoid, tall, skinny shadowy figure drooling black goo from its mouth in a movie, I’m going to lose it, and not in the intended way. 

So anyways, this movie is about a family lucky enough to own property a long ways from the densely-populated city during a mass infection event of some mysterious disease. Already, the lack of context bugged me: where in the sam hill is this house located? Who is this family? What is this disease? How long has it been around? What has its global impact been? I kept waiting for the first rule of science fiction to be honored (a logical explanation of the way the world works in the story), but it never was. While some might argue that the vagueness adds to the scariness of the disease, to me it’s an excuse for lazy writing. There is such little substance in the world building the writers do that it distracts from whatever level of terror I’m supposed to be feeling, and replaces it with annoyance.

Though I shouldn’t have been surprised by the outdated, patriarchal family structure in the movie, I was. The dichotomy between femininity and masculinity was incredibly strong; it was made abundantly clear that the men were protectors, women were caregivers (and meant to be protected), and that these strict roles should be considered ideals. Men made decisions, and women made comments that could easily be dismissed. This is terribly common in horror, pulling on the legacy of the old days of female victimhood (King Kong, Creature From the Black Lagoon, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera). I’d thought we’d made it a little further past that. It’s almost like we need more female horror screenwriters. 

Going into the horror/thriller genre should not be a shortcut into movie making for unimaginative writers. There are some who are raising the standards, like Ari Aster (Midsommer), Julia Ducournau (Raw), and Yorgos Lanthimos (The Lobster, Dogtooth), but it isn’t enough yet to discourage the countless carbon copies of a basic slasher flick. Still, the future looks bright.

PREVIEW: Tous Les Jours

Available to Stream on Amazon Prime is Nicholas Mullin’s masterpiece of a documentary, Tous Les Jours. This intimate portrait of Newfoundland artist Jean Claude Roy follows his daily activity as a landscape visionary. As he gathers his paints and sets off to seize each day, we are led into a beautiful landscape of color that is Jean Claude Roy’s world.

Receiving praise from various film festivals, this documentary will transport you into the life of a true artist.

REVIEW: Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness

If you are looking to watch something equal parts entertaining, crazy, and just plain ridiculous, well Tiger King is absolutely for you. This show had me saying “What the…” probably every 5 minutes, and it kept me absolutely hooked until the very end. I could not believe these were real people, and that these were real problems that they had while running some of the most exotic and crazy private zoos in the US.

As I am sure you must have watched this show already, (and if you haven’t, what are you waiting for?? Seriously!), you know that the story has a totally unexpected ending, which you may or may not agree with. But here are some fun facts that I learned as a result of this show going viral. First, they are re-opening the case of the disappearance of Carol Baskin’s first husband. Second, the creators of this show actually meant to trace the underground world of the snake trade, but just stumbled upon the man in the first scene who had a tiger in a cage in the back of his truck and decided to change their show’s trajectory. And third, which I think is the most crazy, is that the filmmakers were actually filming as the whole story unfolded, and were following the trials and sueings in live time, so they could not have predicted how the show was going to end either!

My favorite part about this mini-series was definitely all of the crazy characters. I could not believe how ridiculous some of them were, from the girl who continued to work at the zoo after her arm was bitten off by a tiger (and went back after only 5 days in the hospital!) to the man who willingly admitted, on camera, that he had been asked and had agreed to assassinate one of the zoo owners’ rivals. I could not believe some of the side stories and anecdotes they were telling with an absolutely straight face, and I was aghast at some of the goings-on at these zoos that was not good for the animals or the people working there. However it is amazing the kind of power that several of the zoo owners seemed to hold over their employees that just kept them working there even though it sounded like an absolute madhouse or sounded like there was no way it could be enjoyable.

Despite all of the human drama, the tigers were absolutely beautiful and majestic. I especially loved the shots of the little ones, who were so cute just scampering around and being played with by the people on screen. I was amazed at how calm some of the zoo workers were around these giant beasts which sometimes were much larger than their handlers. I also loved all of the other animals featured, including lions, elephants, apes, and monkeys.

While I would not recommend this show to anyone who is an absolute animal lover, because there is some very sad animal abuse, I would say this was one of the most intriguing shows I have watched in a while. And now that the show has been released, even more fantastic and wild information is being uncovered about the people who star in it and their lives now. So its like the tv show never ends, which is both a little scary and very exciting to follow!