Review by Sean Boelman
Although those who are less attuned to the sensibilities of Asian horror may not connect with it as well, Kim Jin-won’s meta horror Warning: Do Not Play is absolutely terrifying. Featuring plenty of excellently-crafted dread-inducing suspense in addition to some powerful imagery, it’s a slower burn than most genre flicks, but it works amazingly well.
The film follows a young filmmaker in pre-production on a horror movie when she becomes obsessed with an elusive and notorious student film from a decade ago that was rumored to be the scariest movie ever made and that may have supernatural connections. It’s like a combination of Ringu and The Blair Witch Project, combining the best of the two classics with few of their weaknesses. The way in which Kim structures the movie is very involved and demands a lot from the audience’s attention, which may keep general audiences from enjoying the film as much. However, those who are willing to follow the different layers of self-awareness that Kim continues to build throughout the narrative will enjoy the nuanced exploration of the art of filmmaking. A significant part of the narrative explores the protagonist’s quest to find her own original voice in crafting her movie. Anyone interested in film knows that this is particularly difficult in the horror genre which is so rooted in formula and tradition. Luckily, Kim has found his own voice here with a movie that feels entirely authentic and honest.
The film does a surprisingly good job of developing its protagonist, avoiding a lot of the cliches and archetypes associated with horror movie characters and giving her a substantial and compelling arc. Actress Seo Ye-ji is great in the role, bringing a grounded and emotional feel to a character involved in some unbelievable circumstances.
That said, as is the case with any movie of the genre, the primary purpose here is to scare, and Kim does an excellent job of creeping under viewers’ skin. For much of the film, the audience is immersed in its world, with a particular focus on the movie-within-a-movie. There are a few jump scares, but most of the tension comes from the effective use of atmosphere. Kim’s abilities behind the camera are very obvious here, as the film shows a great command of not only the conventions of the horror genre, but also the ways to subvert the audience’s expectations about them. The use of gore in the movie is sparing, but when it is used, it is highly impactful and disturbing. Warning: Do Not Play proves that foreign horror is often more creative than its American counterparts. This is only Kim Kin-won’s second feature, and it took twelve years for him to release another film after his debut. Hopefully we won’t have to wait that long to see his next one. Warning: Do Not Play streams on Shudder beginning June 11. Rating: 4/5
0 Comments
Review by Sean Boelman
There is a relatively sizable following of people who adore the 2018 film Love, Simon, a cute but conventional LGBTQ+ coming-of-age tale. Initially intended for Disney+ but streaming on Hulu because of its less “family-friendly” content, the new spin-off/sequel series Love, Victor takes those elements from the movie that worked well and adds to them, resulting in a watch that is even more personal.
Set years after the events of Love, Simon in the same high school, the series follows a new student in school as he navigates issues with his friends and family, all the while questioning his sexual orientation. Thankfully, although the title would imply otherwise, the series doesn’t follow the same gimmick as the film, having a completely different and arguably more authentic voice of its own. Something of note is that the series does hold the movie on a ridiculously high pedestal, even making jokes about it in the first episode. It’s almost as if the series is afraid of falling victim to the shadow of its predecessor, so it tries to reclaim it to mixed effect. The show is at its best when it embraces its nature as a heartfelt adolescent soap opera of sorts. The serial format here allows the series to explore issues of sexuality with a lot more depth than a film did, and it works quite well. Whereas Love, Simon was about getting the acceptance of others, the protagonist’s arc in Love, Victor is more about self-acceptance, a part of the experience that isn’t always approached in a nuanced way like this.
This series also fills some of the blindspots left by the movie, such as issues of race and class. Although casting a Latino protagonist may have initially seemed like a diversity play, the series does a very good job of exploring these themes in a satisfying way. The protagonist’s conservative Latino family plays a big role in his journey of figuring himself out, as it would in real life.
Michael Cimino is a very charming lead role, bringing a lot of natural charisma to the character. His chemistry with the rest of the cast, particularly his sidekick played by Anthony Turpel (who deserves to break out after this) is excellent. Performances from Mason Gooding, James Martinez, and Ana Ortiz in the supporting cast are all compelling. And Nick Robinson returns in an inessential but enjoyable role as the narrator. One of the things that made Love, Simon stand out was its undeniable level of energy, and that isn’t as much the case here, as the series takes a much more conventional young adult television format. That said, the soundtrack is still filled with catchy pop tunes that are infectiously fun and give the show some narrative momentum. Love, Victor is the rare TV spin-off that may actually be superior to its source material. With plenty of things that work well and only a few things to fix, it will be interesting to see how season two continues this story. Love, Victor streams on Hulu beginning June 17. Rating: 4.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
An incendiary and timely thriller, Mark Jackson’s This Teacher has a lot on its mind and surprisingly manages to address most of it in a thought-provoking way. Unabashedly political, this film may alienate some viewers with its controversial nature but deserves attention nevertheless as an important work of political commentary.
The movie follows a young French-Muslim woman visting America as she has a falling out with her friend in New York State, pushing her to a seemingly remote cabin upstate where she starts to fear for her life. The plot here takes the backseat to Jackson’s political message, and he pulls no punches in his harsh indictment of American society. The last third of the film is undeniably its most effective portion, and also the part most likely to be divisive, exploring the epidemic of Islamophobia that continues to permeate American culture. It’s a sequence that is both terrifying and heartbreaking, designed to elicit disgust from the audience in one way or the other, and it works. Admittedly, the first two-thirds of the movie meander a bit, and even though the film is not much longer than an hour and a half, the initially aimless nature of the narrative causes it to drag. There are some unnecessary tonal shifts in the script, initially changing from a drama to a horror before settling on the thriller that it needs to be.
That said, the development of the protagonist will keep the audience invested in the story. She has a very compelling and dynamic arc, allowing the movie to succeed as a character study. Unfortunately, the supporting characters aren’t as interesting, written in an archetypal manner, presumably for political effect.
This film really leans on a strong performance from Hafsia Herzi to bring it home, and she absolutely delivers. Despite the challenging subject matter that she has to explore, she does a very good job of grounding the character and making her performance feel entirely real. Lucy Walters and Kevin Kane are also memorable in the supporting cast. On a technical level, the movie does a very good job of making the audience feel trapped right along with the protagonist. This is particularly the case in the final act, which is set primarily in a remote cabin. Jackson brilliantly heightens the tension between the only three characters in the sequence with rapid editing and close shots. This Teacher certainly won’t work for everyone, and the first hour or so is uneven, but the last thirty minutes make it an essential watch. It’s a film meant to challenge the audience, and challenge it does. This Teacher hits VOD on June 9. Rating: 3.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Paul Verhoeven’s Showgirls stands the test of time as one of the most reviled films in cinema history, and yet, there is an ever-growing group of fans who hail it as a misunderstood masterpiece (a school of thought to which this critic ascribes). The new documentary You Don’t Nomi, directed by Jeffrey McHale, is made by and for that fanbase, although it may win some converts for the cult classic.
In the documentary, McHale and a group of critics and fans make an argument as to why Showgirls is long overdue for a widespread critical reevaluation. Although the target audience of the documentary are those that have the least to gain from these arguments, as they will likely already feel the same way, McHale et al. offer some effective tools that can be used in further discussions about the film. A majority of the documentary’s story is told through footage from the film and archive materials supplemented by voiceover narration from critics who are passionate about Verhoeven’s supposed opuscule. The chief of those is Adam Nayman, who wrote an entire book about the topic and brings an air of legitimacy to the arguments set forth. McHale obviously does a very good job of letting the film speak for itself by comparing clips from Showgirls with scenes pulled from other, more acclaimed work in Verhoeven’s repertoire. He does, however, acknowledge some of the undeniable flaws associated with some of the more extreme content towards the latter half of the film.
The thing that the documentary is largely missing is interviews with those that are involved in the film. McHale does make use of some pre-taped interviews and public appearances that the stars and directors made, but this missing element keeps the documentary within adulation territory rather than a deeper exploration of the film and its context.
Although this will easily keep the interest of any who already have a stake in the material, those who haven’t already seen Showgirls may find themselves lost trying to keep up with the in-depth analysis that the interviews offer. As such, the documentary’s broad appeal will be significantly limited. That said, there are a few moments in the documentary that discuss the greater impact that Showgirls had. From nearly derailing the course of its director’s career to inspiring an off-Broadway musical with a cult following of its own, it is these moments that McHale brings to light that will leave the most lasting impact on viewers. You Don’t Nomi is a really interesting documentary, but it is unlikely that most viewers will have the same connection to it. Although this is a hugely unexpected statement, this definitely could have benefitted from the use of some talking heads. You Don’t Nomi hits VOD on June 9. Rating: 3/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Featuring narration by actor Michael Cudlitz (Band of Brothers), the new documentary Return to Hardwick couldn’t have come at a worse time with the increasing mistrust of the federal government. Even though it’s a relatively harmless and inconsequential film, one can’t help but feel like releasing a movie hailing militarization is at least a little bit misguided at the moment.
The film takes a look at the 93rd Bomb Group, a unit of bombers for the United States Army during WWII who were stationed in England. Their story is certainly very interesting, but unfortunately, the focus here is not on the pilots but their descendants who are working to preserve the legacy of their parents and grandparents who fought in the war. While this could have worked to offer an interesting exploration of the legacy of war, it turns out to be something much less compelling. There are simply too many people featured in the movie for it to be a personal reflection on each subject’s memory, so the general survey that director Michael Sellers provides comes off as shallow and jingoistic. The film is also surprisingly ineffective at getting the viewer to respect the people whose military careers it recounts. They are repeatedly claimed to be heroes, but viewers will be left to ask the question why. The movie fails to adequately answer the question of what made the 93rd Bomb Group more exceptional than the rest of the millions of soldiers who served in the war.
The sole purpose of this film seems to be to educate the audience about the importance of history, hence why it more often than not feels like pro-war propaganda. The movie was produced by the 93rd Bombardment Group Association and may have value as a feature-length presentation to squeeze money out of donors or perhaps even to show in a history museum’s screening room, but there just isn’t enough here for it to be effective on its own.
Thankfully, at only seventy-three minutes, the film mostly breezes by. There isn’t anything too emotionally manipulative or upsetting, so history-loving audiences may enjoy this brief crash course in obscure WWII military factoids, but most informed viewers will see it for the unnecessarily commercial product that it is. The best part of the movie is undoubtedly Sellers’s excellent use of archive materials to tell the story. The film starts out with a poem written by one of the bombers that presents a really interesting meditation on war. However, when the movie gets into the meat of the fly-on-the-wall footage, it begins to fall apart. Return to Hardwick isn’t a terrible documentary, but it’s a jingoistic reflection on the past that fails to justify its release to the general public. Those with vested interests in the public will enjoy it, but otherwise, it’s pretty unspectacular. Return to Hardwick hits VOD on June 9. Rating: 2/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Written and directed by Gil Junger (10 Things I Hate About You), the new comedy Think Like a Dog may be one of the most out-there family films in a while. With a lot of pandering for international audiences and some absolutely insane plotting, this can hardly be described as a good movie, but it’s also a lot more entertaining than it has the right to be.
The film tells the story of a middle schooler whose science fair experiment has the unexpected result of him forming a telepathic connection with his dog. Even though this may seem like a pretty run-of-the-mill talking dog movie, there’s a lot more going on here, maybe even a bit too much, including a spy adventure and a cautionary tale about corporate greed. Perhaps the most frustrating thing about the movie is that it tries to juggle too many things at once. In addition to the comedy and action storylines, there is an attempt to include legitimate drama. One of these storylines takes place in China and is so underdeveloped that it feels like little more than an attempt to make it appeal to a more diverse audience. It’s really a shame — that character has the potential to be really compelling but is instead just a token. The other storyline involves the protagonist’s parents experiencing a rift in their relationship leading to a possible divorce. The film’s perspective on this issue is at least mildly problematic. The script treats divorce as if it is the single worst thing that could happen to a family when, in reality, sometimes it is necessary for the physical or mental health and safety of either the parents or the children.
That said, the film still works surprisingly well thanks to the relationship that is built between the human and canine leads. The boy and his dog stuff here works pretty well, but it’s arguably funnier to see the dog being a pre-teen’s wingman. Even though it’s silly and immature humor, it will crack kids up and amuse their adult companions.
Gabriel Bateman is definitely a very charming young actor with a very clear and developed screen presence, even when given material that is as ridiculous as this. One of the more questionable decisions in the movie is the casting of Josh Duhamel and Megan Fox as his parents. Although their age difference is minimal, they don’t have very good romantic chemistry together. On a technical level, the film obviously isn’t made with the highest of production values, but one can’t fault it for not swinging big. There are a couple major setpieces, including one set in an airport hangar, that are minimal but mostly effective. It’s a competent modestly-budgeted family comedy. Think Like a Dog may not be a great movie, but as mindless family entertainment, it’s more satisfying than a lot of the more recent mainstream options have been. For families needing an hour and a half of indoor diversion, this isn’t a bad choice. Think Like a Dog hits VOD on June 9. Rating: 2.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
A new adult animated series from some of the producers and writers of the popular anthology show Robot Chicken, Hulu’s medieval parody Crossing Swords seems like a direct answer to the recent trend in flashy, big-budget fantasy television shows. Simple but far from one-note, this series has no shortage of laughs, especially when it gets into a veritable rhythm.
The series follows a peasant who dreams of becoming a squire for the King, only to find himself in over his head when he actually gets the opportunity to fulfill his dreams. The core series arc is an underdog story, a common trope for both adult animation and the genre which it is parodying, but what makes this series stand out are the individual adventures on which the characters embark. After the first episode establishes the characters and kicks everything off, each subsequent one places the characters in wacky fantasy-based hijinks. Although some of these are more compelling than others (an episode set in a minotaur maze is hilarious, while one centered around a single chastity belt gag feels derivative), there is enough diversity in the styles of humor for the series to consistently work. Those moments in the show which go all-in on the darker humor work best, eliciting the strongest laughs. At times, there are anachronisms used to poke fun at more modern phenomena (such as music festivals), but even more impressive is when the series uses its fantasy as an allegory. (The single best episode involves the characters visiting a supposedly egalitarian utopia.)
One of the areas in which the series has substantial room to improve is in developing its characters. Although the core characters work — the protagonist, his comically dumb sidekick, the King, and the Princess are all very compelling — there is something left to be desired from the rest of the players. For example, a storyline involving the Queen is introduced but left underdeveloped. Perhaps she can be explored more in future seasons.
The voice cast that was assembled for this series is filled with talented comedians and dramatic actors alike, and it is very effective. An almost unrecognizable Nicholas Hoult voices the protagonist and is absolutely hilarious in the role. Other memorable performances come from Luke Evans, Tara Strong, Yvette Nicole Brown, and Tony Hale in the supporting cast. Of course, from people who worked on Robot Chicken, one would expect creative animation and director John Harvatine IV delivers. The series is made with an advanced and detailed form of peg doll animation, and it surprisingly immerses the viewer within the fantasy world of the story extremely well. Crossing Swords can admittedly feel a bit all over the place at times, but it has no shortage of laughs. Creators John Harvatine IV and Tom Root are obviously very talented at writing comedy, resulting in an entertaining and bingeable watch. Crossing Swords debuts on Hulu on June 12. Rating: 3.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Although it was initially going to have a robust festival run prior to its summer theatrical release, Judd Apatow’s newest dramedy The King of Staten Island is instead making its way to audiences in the comfort of their own homes, and that may be for the best. Those who are already fans of Apatow and star Pete Davidson may enjoy the film, but most audiences will see it as a missed opportunity.
Partly inspired by Davidson’s own life, the movie follows a twenty-something slacker still living with his mother as he is forced to grow up after finding himself with more responsibilities. And while the personal touch helps a bit, the film does little to differentiate itself from the slew of slacker comedies (a genre with which both Apatow and Davidson are already familiar). Perhaps the biggest issue with the film is that it is simply too long. A common complaint for Apatow’s work is that it is overly bloated, and that has never been more the case than it is here. The first hour is very dull, the multiple scenes of Davidson’s character smoking and screwing around with his buds blending together. When the real conflict comes in around the middle of the movie, it becomes somewhat compelling but will have lost most viewers’ interest by then. The protagonist does have a fully-developed arc, but it is so predictable and conventional that it has little effect. There’s obviously some pity, especially if one is familiar with Davidson’s past and what he has gone through, but the script deals in well-worn tropes to an extent that it doesn’t have the emotional effect it needs to flourish.
In the final act of the film, audiences will get a glimpse at what it should have been: a reflective portrait of a person trying to deal with living in the shadow of a legacy. However, it takes a long time to get there, and the romantic comedy elements that compose a majority of the first act are left underbaked.
Davidson can be a funny character actor, but unfortunately, this shows that he wasn’t quite ready to carry a film on his own. When he has someone hilarious to bounce off of, like Bill Burr (the absolute highlight of the cast), he’s pretty charming. But when he’s alone, it’s hard to buy what he’s selling. That said, with some tuning of his dramatic range, he could be a legitimate star. Apatow has always been a relatively safe director behind the camera, focusing more on the actors and dialogue than visual storytelling. Yet since these elements are weak here, the movie falls apart. There’s no sense of momentum to be found, leaving the story to wander aimlessly. The saving grace is the soundtrack, which is pretty inspired and leads to some of the funniest and most memorable scenes. Despite valiant efforts from Judd Apatow and Pete Davidson, The King of Staten Island just doesn’t work as well as they had hoped. Davidson’s fanbase will probably connect with this, and others will find it to be unnecessarily protracted. The King of Staten Island hits VOD on June 12. Rating: 1.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
The latest entry in ESPN’s sports history docuseries 30 for 30, Bao Nguyen’s documentary Be Water chronicles the life of martial arts legend Bruce Lee. A conventional biography in many ways, but one that will still be important for fans and general audiences alike, this may be one of the most emotional documentaries of the year so far.
The film takes a look at the legendary life of martial artist and actor Bruce Lee as he struggles to be accepted as an Asian-American in an industry that, at the time, offered few opportunities for people of color. Because of the ESPN connection, one would expect this movie to lean heavily into the martial arts aspects of the story, but the focus here is rather on the social aspects of the story. Of course, the film takes some time to explore how Lee introduced a then-foreign form of martial arts to the United States, bringing a part of his culture to the world in a beautiful way. Nguyen realizes that most people will already be familiar with this story, though, so he only hits upon the important elements, spending much of his time elsewhere. Those moments in the movie that are most emotional are the archive footage featuring Lee as he discusses his career and attempts to make his big break. Lee is obviously now remembered as a beloved figure despite his tragically small filmography, so it’s hard to think of him having ever struggled to make it in the first place. Even more heartbreaking, though, is that people of color are still facing similar issues in Hollywood today.
In this time in which diversity is the buzzword in the industry today, people can learn a lot from Lee’s story. It is by no means easy for a person of color to make it in Hollywood, or any high-profile industry for that matter. Even one of the most respected action stars of all time had difficulty gaining recognition at first. Until that necessary change can be made, it is our job to learn from minority trailblazers such as Lee how to lift each other up.
Nguyen also effectively incorporates interviews with various people who were close to Lee while he was alive. From his family members to his co-stars, plenty of well-known figures share their story of how Lee impacted them and their lives personally, culminating in what has to be one of the most exceptional end-credits sequences ever committed to the screen. Inarguably the most impressive part of Nguyen’s style is his brilliant use of archive footage. Although the other narrative techniques like interviews or Lee’s writings read by his daughter all play their own part in the film, it is the footage of Lee himself that will speak to audiences the most. On top of the nostalgia it will undoubtedly cause to resurface, his wisdom is simply beyond inspiring. Be Water is exactly the biography that fans want and need of Bruce Lee. Sure to leave audiences of all backgrounds without a dry eye, this documentary is both fascinating and meaningful. Be Water airs on ESPN on June 7 at 9pm ET and will be available on ESPN+ following its debut. Rating: 4/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Initially presenting itself as something more than it actually is, Korean filmmaker Hong Sang-soo’s low-concept fantasy Yourself and Yours is really more of a quaint romantic comedy. And while there is a certain level of charm about the film, its structure is likely a bit too off-putting for most mainstream tastes.
The movie follows a couple as their relationship and lives are thrown into turmoil over rumors and secrets, sending them each into a rabbit hole of self-discovery and trying to find companionship and romance. Billed as a “comedic mystery”, perhaps a bit misleadingly, the film is more accurately described as a mistaken identity dramedy with a penchant for playing with the audience’s perception. This mystery is ultimately more in the audience’s mind than anything else. In what is a very unorthodox narrative structure, a majority of the conflict comes in the first twenty or so minutes, with the rest of the movie being mostly conversational. After a while, it becomes clear that the film is enjoyed best if viewers stop caring about what is actually happening and focus on what is being said. The central message of the movie involves the idea of the truth and its importance in a relationship. In a farcical way, Hong poses the question of whether or not the truth really matters in a relationship such as that being depicted on screen, and while audiences will almost certainly have a strong opinion about the matter, the film asks viewers to challenge their preconceptions.
However, with the ambiguity of the characters, it becomes difficult to form a legitimate connection with any of them. A majority of the strongest development comes in the second act, but that is when audiences will mostly be trying to wrap their heads around what is happening, and by the time the story reaches its resolution, it feels anticlimactic.
That said, the actors do a really solid job in their roles. Yoo-Young Lee is particularly impressive in her role that is spectacularly complex. Lee has to show a lot of range because of the demands of the character, and she pulls off every part of it in a believable yet intriguing way. Her chemistry with co-star Ju-hyuk Kim is also notable. On a technical level, the movie is a bit rough as a result of its episodic nature. For the most part, the film is jumping between conversations featuring two or three characters. It’s a simple set-up, and it often works, but the cuts to black are sometimes jarring. On the other hand, the last sequence is excellent and makes one wish that Hong had consistently done a bit more. Yourself and Yours desperately wants to be something special, but it doesn’t quite deliver. Still, thanks to some compelling dialogue, it’s worth watching if viewers can focus on what the movie has to say rather than what it is. Yourself and Yours is now streaming online in partnership with indie theaters. A list of participating locations can be found here. Rating: 3/5 |
Archives
May 2024
Authors
All
|