Change Your Image
mattspach
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Always Be My Maybe (2019)
Worthless
Only watch this movie if you are looking to giggle at how pointless and boring a romcom can possibly be. Characters had no interesting traits and didn't make any sense. Storyline got worse and worse as it went along. Even the writers who are the stars don't seem to understand how to properly deliver the lines. Almost any possible joke in the script was missed by bad timing.
Song to Song (2017)
Self-indulgent Pointless Garbage
There is absolutely no reason any human being would want to waste their time watching this plot-less, character-less, emotion-less piece of absolute garbage. In the midst of laughing hysterically at what is intended to be a dramatic and thought-provoking piece of 'cinematic art' I kept telling myself "This has to be the worst film ever made". I have a great deal of respect for most of the artists involved in the making of this film including Malick, who has made some absolutely amazing, groundbreaking movies in his career. On top of that I can't stand the formulaic and overplayed Hollywood movies that keep flying off the shelves, which is why I go out of my way to watch films like this.
Similar to the two previous projects of Terrence Malick (To the Wonder and Knight of Cups), we are introduced vaguely into a small window in the lives of a few individuals without being given any character development of narrative base. Without a basic understanding of who are characters are and what they like about each other or what their personalities are like we cannot even force ourselves to have the smallest bit invested in the story. Not only is the acting impossible to take seriously, the directing is ten times as bad. We are constantly unsure who's story is being told and the role that each character plays on the lives of the others. This is a star-studded cast of trained actors, but they are thrust into this overbearingly indulgent sphere of artsy fartsy cinematography and false profundity being delivered through emotionless voice-over.
Ryan Gosling has by far the best performance, and can almost be believed to be a real person once or twice. Yet we cannot be sure what's happened to him or what his desires, intentions, or beliefs are. The other performances are all absolute garbage but maybe has to do with the editing, which removed almost every scene with any dialogue. If you went through this movie, amongst the touching of walls and occasional touching of shoulders and stomachs, I don't think you could find a single cohesive scene where the goals or relationships of the characters could be defined or even interpreted without making huge assumptions.
The Texas music scene was a complete gimmick and had absolutely nothing to do with the storyline or characters in any way. It was just used as a way to create some rhythm to the editing of what would have otherwise been a film entirely devoted to absurd prancing around, birdlike mating rituals, touching each other sensually, and then having a glow-stick party just to transition smoothly to another pointless, indulgent scene that doesn't develop anything new. So the "music scene setting" was an excuse to get a few famous musicians to film in your movie, and a way to explain the background of a film without a background.
The fact that this was shot in 2012, and not screened until 2017, gives me a pretty clear idea of how much garbage they originally shot. But it also raises the question as to why these specific shots and 'scenes' were chosen for the final cut. I feel terribly bad for Rooney Mara, who may have had a few good performances in there somewhere, but must have been cut somewhere along the way. For the first half of the films she doesn't say a single word on screen but seems to be the main character. In the end we don't feel sorry, we don't forgive, we're not proud of her, we basically don't give two shits what happens to any of them. And we aren't told what happens to any of them or given even the slightest glimpse of a conclusion. As someone who loves unanswered questions as a natural part of storytelling, normally I wouldn't mind this. But in Song to Song I found myself constantly saying, "what the heck is happening?" and "Who are these people?" and "Why are they doing these strange mating ritual things and looking away from each other in empty public spaces?" Those aren't the kind of unanswered questions that make you think.
The absolute number one criticism I have for the film is that hardly a quarter of the time are the characters doing anything that I would consider "normal" human behavior. Not one natural exchange, not one human emotion that wasn't overridden by self-proclaiming, melodramatic, bourgeois, in-your face filmmaking. It is trying to explore big ideas like trust and betrayal, obsession and connection, and past vs present, but there have simply been far too many films that have already explored these concepts in much better, easily interpreted and more enjoyable to watch ways. Majority of the film is spent with two characters walking in different directions running their hands along poles or walls, and the other half they are doing inappropriate public displays of affection. Also the setting changes almost every shot and there is never any explanation as to why or any logical explanation given as to why they are so alone in these public environments. I thought for a second he was pulling another artistic gimmick like "they are in their own world" or something like that, but that reading can't be justified because there is once in a while a few other people around.
My condolences to the editors, who had to cut this down for Malick's original 8 hour cut, and the actors who's performances were sabotaged by a crappy vision.
Experimenter (2015)
An oddly adapted version of a very interesting point in the history of psychology
First off, Dr. Milgram's work is a great subject for a film and left the door open for a million ways for this story to be told. The positive side: It's a well-cast rendition which covers the basic points in the man's life. For someone who has never read about his work, I think it's a great introduction.
The performances are not bad, but I think as a result of a weak script, the action plays out in a very dry and unemotional way. Stylistic decisions (such as direct address of the audience by the title character in almost every scene) make it very hard to take this film seriously or to have any real response. Many moments in the film seem to be reenactments done as snippets of a bad documentary on Milgram, where others hit right on the dot.
All in all they tried to cover too much material for one film and should have found something more specific to focus on. They style cinematography, direct address of camera, and moments of green-screened action on black and white backgrounds, make the film very hard to suspend disbelief. It was nice to see someone attempt a style outside the Hollywood formula, but sadly this one didn't choose the right methods of experimentation.
Zoolander 2 (2016)
What a waste of time
As a big fan of the original with respect for many of these filmmakers, Zoolander 2 was one of the worst sequels I've ever seen. I think with the sudden trend of sequels to classic comedies like Joe Dirt and Anchorman, as well as Ben Stiller's desire to be relevant again, he decided to make something guaranteed to make some money in the box office. But it is clear that they approached the project with no artistic integrity. It was well into the second act that I realized I had not laughed at a single joke. Clearly there is a format for the Zoolander comedy type in which silly phrases are repeated, people misunderstand one another, and characters make connections through absurd or ironic interactions. And there were a few times where the dialogue was witty, but almost every gag was a direct reference to the first film or a pop-culture reference. The pop culture references fell flat on every attempt, and direct allusions to the original are in my opinion a cop out in order to avoid writing an actually funny film. I must admit the last 40 minutes or so upped the ante a bit, but I still couldn't see any reason to make this film. Subplots about both models becoming fathers, the side characters in the fashion world, and the overly dramatic production/soundtrack, all fell flat as well. I was really hoping that this film would have something to it, but sadly it was just another pointless homage to a classic film which the world could have done without. A silly sequel a few years after is kind of worthy of forgiveness, but 15 years later is embarrassing. These filmmakers are capable of much, much more.
Inherent Vice (2014)
A Real Brain-Twister
Although I must admit that this film is incredibly hard to follow on the first watch, the entertaining moments are worth it and the exact plot line is not the most important thing about the film. Based off Thomas Pynchon's 2009 novel and directed by Hollywood's mastermind auteur PT Anderson, Inherent Vice is like a drug in itself. From scene to scene we may not know exactly what is happening in terms of the story, but clearly neither does our lead character Doc Sportello, portrayed in another convincing performance by Joaquin Phoenix. The hippie private detective's series of conspiracy theories evolve slowly as he collects more ironic and oxymoronic snippets of information. His quest to locate his missing ex-girlfriend which grows into a search for real estate mogul Mickey Wolfman, then leads to an obsession with an underground group known as "The Golden Fang". Are they a syndicate, smugglers, sailors, dentists? I hesitate to give too much away, but I will say that the cinematography and editing employed here are fitting to the story without ever becoming intrusive to the viewing experience. We never leave the side of Doc, as we follow him through every single scene. In this way, we experience the mystery in his shoes, and are able to feel his confusion and obsession by exposure to the exact same developments that he is. On the second viewing it became a million times easier to grasp the detailed plot, making the humor and situational irony even easier to appreciate. Another unique and enjoyable piece by Anderson, Phoenix as his male muse. Good performances, stylish filmmaking, and a complicated story that paints a picture of a comic-bookish character within a transformative point in California history.