Train Dreams

It's a pretty movie!

Movie: Train Dreams

Running Time: 1:42 (Is there an award for being under two hours?)

Nominated for: Best Picture, Cinematography, Original Song, Adapted Screenplay

How I watched: Netflix

When it had me: Golden Hour!

When it lost me: Lack of trains?

What systems does it challenge: Hustle Culture. Maybe.

This movie was heavy on the dreams but light on the trains. I think I expected it to be about the railroad and it really isn't at all. 

The first thing I noticed was that most of the first half of the film is shot at magic hour. That is both gorgeous and quite a feat. The affect of all these many colored skies and golden light filtering through trees is a very romantic one. It serves the story of Joel Edgerton's character building a life with Felicity Jones and it also serves a larger theme.

Overall there is a quiet and contemplative feel to the film. It's a kind of meditation on a time when life had less noise and bustle and perhaps more freedom to forge your own path. Edgerton works as a logger and once as a railroad worker (there's the train!) and builds a homestead with his wife. While the work appears difficult there is also a sense that you a shape your life however you want. You can build or maintain, you can lounge among the trees and exist with nature. There are fewer templates and expectations in place.

So for me the movie really asks, what defines a life or a person without the more rigid expectations that we live with today? Is it your work? Is it your family? Is it what you are proud of or the moments that haunt you? Or is it some deeper connection to everything around you that you might discover when you have the time to do so?

It's dreamy and languid at times, dark and lonely at other times but it feels like a worthwhile thought exercise. It's a unique and lovely little movie. And it happened in under two hours! You KNOW how highly I approve of this!

P.S. I called this film a meditation and then found out that the calm app made a meditative sleepstory based on this movie! Have you heard of this? It's a 22 minute retelling of the film with nature sounds and soft music. Check it out here.

Sentimental Value

*she is formerly known as the Worst Person in the World

Movie: Sentimental Value

Running Time: 2:13

Nominated for: Best Picture, Directing, Leading Actress, Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress Twice, Editing, International Feature, Original Screenplay

How I watched: Prime

When it had me: Renate Reinsve

When it lost me: I got sleepy briefly in the middle

What systems does it challenge: The only thing it might challenge is avoidance of therapy?

Sentimental Value is a family drama of both tiny moments and epic emotions. This is such a unique piece of writing. The way the story bounces around from character to character and from era to era is organic and unpredictable. It's like a piece of music, changing tempo and rhythm as it goes.

My only quibble with the editing is repeated cuts to black between scenes, even very short vignettes sometimes. It felt a little choppy to me but I tried to embrace each one as a breath.

The acting is terrific. With four acting nominations from one film, it makes me wonder how it didn't get nominated for casting. It seems like they did something right! 

Sadness becomes its own character and we follow it on its wavering path through generations of this family. The question becomes how can a father and daughter who are so far apart and need so much from each other bridge the gap? It seems so real; a divide that maybe we have all seen in our own families. Something so simple and yet seemingly impossible to solve.

Beautiful film making!

The Secret Agent

This guy is just immediately trustworthy and sympathetic!

Movie: The Secret Agent

Running Time: 2:40

Nominated for: Best Picture, Leading Actor, Casting, International Feature

How I watched: AMC

When it had me: Immediately

When it lost me: The very end, unfortunately

What systems does it challenge: Dictatorship, Corruption

This movie was engaging. 

Did you know that Netflix has asked all of its directors to dumb down their movies? They want more exposition and they want the filmmakers to tell and not show because they know that most of us are on our phones while we sit at home and watch shows so they want it easier for us to follow along. Frankly, I'd rather you make something so good that I want to put my phone down to focus on it.

That's what The Secret Agent is. It is complex and they throw you right in the middle of intrigue, only scattering clues along the path as you go. The lead actor, Wagner Moura possesses a combo of charm, warmth and mystery in Pedro Pascal proportions and I was completely drawn in.

The setting is (mostly) 1977 and the vibe is spot on. The colors, music, fashion, even the soft focus of the camera completely evoke the era in a very immersive way. 

Get ready for what I'm about to say next: this movie is 2 hours and 40 minutes and I find the running time completely justified! I know. It's shocking for me to say so. There were so many characters and intertwining storylines that they actually used the time in a constructive and non-repetitive way. In fact, they left me wanting more. I still had questions at the end.

The main thrust is that the main character is on the outs with his dictatorial government (as well as some others) and is in hiding until he can get new paperwork that allows him to leave the country with his young son. You know, the kind of story they will be telling about Americans in five to eight years. There is a mix of realism, surrealism and absurdism in the filmmaking styles but it always stay grounded on the main goal.

Ok, the end is where they lost me a little. It was so engaging and immersive that when they made a choice to pull back on the story telling style for the ending it felt anti-climactic. I have read up on reasons for the way they told the story and these ideas may work on an intellectual level but in reality it was a small let down. If they had nailed the end, this would have been in my top five movies of the year. It isn't but its still really great film making.

Bugonia

What's going on here?

Movie: Bugonia

Running Time: 1:59

Nominated for: Best Picture, Leading Actress, Original Score, Adapted Screenplay

How I watched: AMC

When it had me: The Trailer

When it lost me: Abuse of the vulnerable

What systems does it challenge: Conspiracies, Revenge

I have not been looking forward to reviewing this movie.

Emma Stone, Jesse Plemmons and Aidan Delbis put in fantastic performances in this very wild movie. The latter two believe that Emma is an alien and must be stopped at all costs. So there is an attack and kidnapping and a whole lot of crazy in service of that goal.

This movie is classified as a comedy/sci-fi. The trailer looked like events would be absurd and silly and very funny but that was not my experience of the movie. I read one review that stated it was listed as a thriller at their theatre. Which has got me curious again, who makes the official call? What did Lanthimos want us to see it as? 

There is a vulnerable character who suffers manipulation, abuse and ultimately harm and it shook me. I couldn't square that with the idea of this being a comedy. I'm trying to figure out if I went in thinking it was a horror film if I would have been able to withstand the brutality of the film. But specifically envisioning the director laughing about certain events made me feel really uncomfortable; like when a party gets too raucous or a boss starts telling racist jokes. I was no longer in a safe space and I just wanted out.

All of the elements are top notch. It's shot beautifully, it's paced well, it sounds and looks like the work of a director at the top of his game. I have no complaints with the film making in that sense.

The movie is so completely out of pocket that it should have been fun for me. I can't exactly pin down what I think the message is here. We're definitely getting a warning about conspiracy theories but it also feels like there is more to it. The genius is lost on me but it certainly has gotten through to most viewers better than it did for me. I'm glad it's been an enjoyable experience for so many.

Hamnet

Me when my kids perform at Shakespeare Camp

Movie: Hamnet

Running Time: 2:05

Nominated for: Best Picture, Director, Leading Actress, Casting, Costumes, Original Score, Production Design, Adapted Screenplay

How I watched: AMC

When it had me: Shakespeare

When it lost me: The Title, almost?

What systems does it challenge: I'm not sure this one fits in that mold?

I don't know why the title of this film annoys me so much. It's from the book of the same name, by Maggie O'Farrell and immediately the movie explains that this name is interchangeable with Hamlet. So why interchange them? I don't know; I just had to get over it.

The film imagines the behind the scene story of why Shakespeare wrote Hamlet. I want to ask why we need to make guesses about this but the movie is too good for me to worry about it.

First, let's talk about witchcraft! In this imagining, William unapologetically marries a witch of the wood. She communes with the forest, has ancestral knowledge of herbs, healing and spell-casting. She is prophetic and feral and powerful. Jesse Buckley really deeply embodies this role and delivers something above and beyond. I can't imagine her not winning.

Paul Mescal is equally incredible as the bard himself. As a self-professed Shakespeare nerd, I wanted to spend a little more time with this character and the words of Hamlet, my very favorite play ever. It took some time to get there but when we did, it was so worthwhile.

Ultimately, the movie is an exploration about grief and what we do with it. As a viewer, I sat a long time in some very uncomfortable emotional landscapes but it never felt cheap. The acting was too damn good. It always felt truthful rather than manipulative.

This was a beautiful, troubling, and ultimately hopeful space to inhabit for a couple of hours. It made me feel like there is truly magic in nature, love and creativity and through those practices we can not only survive but thrive.

F1

Brad Pitt go fast!

Movie: F1

Running Time: 2:35

Nominated for: Best Picture, Editing, Sound, Visual Effects

How I watched: Apple TV

When it had me: The First Race

When it lost me: Racing!

What systems does it challenge: Participation Trophies

Congratulations F1 for having the shortest title of all! I was not at all looking forward to a movie about cars racing because I know that kind of movie is not for me. Putting that aside, let's take a look.

This is probably a favorite for sound and editing. Both categories were well done here except that I don't think this movie needed to be this long. At all. I just keep repeating myself, but I must call out the need to shorten these films. However, this is a movie where you can really see the editing, which people like to vote for.

There was a grumpy "kids these days" theme to the first act, with Brad Pitt being all gruff and too blonde and wanting everything to be the way it used to be which I found trite. There was a lot of trite, actually. In the first ten minutes my teenager guessed that the plot was basically the same as Cars 3 and was essentially correct. The exception being that Lightning McQueen has a character arc in Cars 3 and the entire arc for Brad Pitt was that he learned a new slang term. A twist or a surprise or some growth wouldn't have hurt.

Acting across the board was very solid from a really great cast. The first few races were pretty exciting and then I got numb to it. The final race ended up being the least engaging for me. It was the only time they just jumped in and didn't explain strategy first and it went on for a very long time. I wanted to be more in it than I was.

F1 is a movie, competently made, but not a special watch for someone not into the subject matter.

Frankenstein

This dress was worth the cost to see it on the big screen.

Movie: Frankenstein

Running Time: 2:30

Nominated for: Best Picture, Supporting Actor, Cinematography, Costumes, Make Up & Hair, Original Score, Production Design, Sound, Adapted Screenplay

How I watched: Landmark Theatre

When it had me: Costumes!

When it lost me: Story framing

What systems does it challenge: Unchecked ego disguised as progress and strict societal norms

With Guillermo del Toro directing, it is no surprise for me to tell you Frankenstein is visually stunning. I made sure to see it on a big screen even though it was already streaming. The costumes, in particular are breath taking.

The movie begins with Dr. Frankenstein telling his story to a ship captain and it returns to this story framing device throughout the movie. While I enjoy hearing the lessons he has learned along the way, this framing device added a lot of time to the film. I was not feeling engaged by the interludes aboard the ship and the long speeches of telling we had to endure before we could return to showing.

I particularly enjoyed the section where the Creature goes out on his own and forges relationships in the world and discovers that the world exists to hunt you for who you are. It was heartbreaking and beautiful story telling. 

Oscar Isaac and Jacob Elordi were both great in their roles and brought a lot of life (ha! get it?) to the screen. I did not connect as much with Mia Goth's character as the film went on and ultimately was confused by what her goals were. But she looked fabulous!

I know this is probably going to win for make up for the Creature Design and strangely, I did not care for it. It reminded me of Nebula in Guardians of the galaxy and I didn't feel like it looked like it was made from humans. Too alien for me.

Overall it is a beautiful film about trying to exist in the world when you fall too outside the norm. Del Toro loves his monsters and I do too.