A Halloween Sampler for All Souls: 2019 Edition!

Halloooooooooooo!

Happy Halloween dear friends and readers!  Once again, it is that special and spooky time of year: time for a review of this year's creepy movies!

As is our grand tradition, for today's post our usual 1 - 5 rating scale will be augmented with the scary/intense rating system of 1 - 5 exclamation points thusly:

! = not at all scary 

!!!!! = so scary!

Let's dive right in!

"Us" (2019)

Rating: 3 Scary Rating: !!!!

If you remember my extremely enthusiastic reaction to "Get Out" (2017), you can probably imagine how sincerely excited and hopeful I was for director Jordan Peele's second foray into feature-length horror.  I WAS SO EXCITED--so much so that I dragged Husband to a showing on opening weekend, convinced it would be worth the effort to see "Us" with a large audience.

I wasn't wrong about the value of seeing the movie with a big opening-weekend audience--they absolutely enhanced our viewing experience, but unfortunately not because the movie was everything I'd hoped.  While "Us" was absolutely inventive and at times pulse-pounding, as you'd hope a good horror movie would be, it was also over-burdened with an unfocused and confusing plot and backstory.  Compared to the taught and bracing social commentary of "Get Out," to my chagrin "Us" left me feeling a bit fuzzy-headed by its over-complicated universe and distracted by its plot holes.  What helped save our viewing experience was the very entertaining laughter and mockery deriding the unintentionally funny bits of the movie from our fellow moviegoers.  I would definitely still recommend seeing it, but with dampened expectations compared to "Get Out."

"Deliver Us" (2017)

Rating: 2 Scary Rating: !!

This year's documentary entry!  While unsettling, because it lacks any narration or interviews to give its footage more context and explanation, "Deliver Us" unfortunately doesn't deliver as much intensity and intrigue as I'd hoped it would.  Don't get me wrong--it's definitely still unsettling to watch footage of actual rites of exorcism--but this film could have delivered so much more.

"The Endless" (2017)

Rating: 3 Scary Rating: !!!

While the moderate production value of this movie might be a bit distracting at first, the cult/sci-fi/horror mash-up "The Endless" certainly makes up for that with an interesting premise that reveals itself gradually throughout the course of the film.  It doesn't pack a huge horror punch, but it's definitely tense and intriguing!

"Joker" (2019)

Rating:1 Scary Rating: !!

Long ago, I bemoaned the boatload of emotionally monotonic films fixated on the soulless male psychopath.  Well, here we are again.  To "Joker"'s credit, it is in possession of a discernible a plot arc--there is a beginning, middle, and end, and by the film's finale the titular Joker has arrived somewhere very different than where he began.  That said, I just can't help but be extremely bored by the mercilessly flatlined emotional arc of this film and films like it.  To use what is definitely a Mom word, this movie is so concertedly and aggressively grim I can't help but roll my eyes at it.  I needed some emotional variation--humor, a flash of hope or sadness, something--to break up the monotonous two hours of bleakness of that comprise this movie, and it never came.  But they threw in some violence, so I guess at least it's a bit scary?

"Invasion of the Body Snatchers" (1956)

Rating: 2 Scary Rating: !!!*

* Scariness not based on the movie's original scary intent.

This year's throw-back-y entry!  This year, Husband and I watched the original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" for our annual evening of jack-o'-lantern carving.  It was a perfect selection--campy and fun.  However, it was definitely and unintentionally alarming when we had a simultaneous moment of revelation about the intention behind the film's conceit: that it was a pro-McCarthyist film, not anti.  Watching the product of an industry that was profoundly negatively impacted by Communist blacklisting and fear mongering is certainly a bit dizzying and creepy--but again, not for the reasons originally intended!

That concludes this year's scary movie offerings!  I hope you all enjoy a holiday that is precisely as fun and frightening as you wish it to be!

{Heart}

Erratum: "Once Upon a Time" I Saw a Movie and Totally Forgot About It

Hello!

Remember how last month I was like, "Aw I feel bad because I didn't see any movies in August"?

So.  About that.

I absolutely did see a movie in August.  Admittedly, only one movie.  But still: I went out to see it in a theater, making a whole night of it.  It was a thing I watched in its entirety.  I didn't fall asleep in the middle of it or get nauseated and have to leave early.  There is really no excuse for me just totally omitting this experience from my memory.

Except.

The movie I saw was Quentin Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood" (2019).

And it was just so forgettable.

Some bullet points:

• At a 2 hour, 40 minute running time, it is unforgivably long, especially given that it is

• packed with boring dialogue from a director we know can deliver snappy, memorable dialogue even when characters are just shooting the shit together, so what the hell happened??  And worse still, that bad dialogue is happening in 

• yet ANOTHER self-worshipping movie about making movies, so many of which are mind-numbingly, preciously self-revering and therefore boring and therefore don't need to be made.  Worse still, it is

• kiiiiiind of deeply misogynistic?  Like: 

• The film super briefly alludes to the fact that the ostensible hero of the movie murdered his wife as if this is nothing more than a kind of Joan Vollmer-esque piece of trivia/footnote?  

• And the inevitable Tarantino gore-fest at the end directs WAY more extensive and vicious violence at two women than at their male counterpart who arguably bears much more responsibility for the heinous acts they planned to commit?  

• And actually this male ringleader is dispatched with comparatively little suffering, especially in Tarantino terms?

• And while we're revisiting this premise of revisionist history revenge fantasy that may be becoming a bit of a preoccupation of Tarantino's, instead of going all the way with it and having Sharon Tate be her own damn savior--especially after you showed her training with Bruce Freaking Lee--we have two random dudes (one of whom, again, MURDERED HIS WIFE OMG THIS IS NOT A SMALL MATTER) save the day instead?

• Also speaking of preoccupations--and I don't mean this as kink-shaming because to each their own, but it was just genuinely distracting--what is Tarantino's thing with showing us the dirty soles of women's feet?

Apparently this is truly a thing of his.

So yeah.  It was irritatingly problematic, but also, it was dull.  

In summation, the good news: I saw a thing last month, and therefore did not go a full month without watching a film for the first time in recent memory.

The bad news: my streak is unbroken because I saw this utterly bleh movie.

I gave this one a 2.

See you next month!

{Heart}

An Unintentional Hiatus

Hey there friends,

I come to you today with a confession: Perhaps for the first time in the history of this writing-about-films endeavor, I watched no movies in this entire month.

This is not for lack of interest.  There are definitely movies I want(ed) to see this month--past tense in at least one case because I unfortunately missed my chance to see one in theaters.  For the others, I'm hoping to take advantage of this long weekend to ensure I don't lose out on seeing at least one of them on the big screen (especially since this is my second chance to see one of them after it was featured in a certain film fest I am very fond of).

It's also not for lack of trying.  I started "What Men Want" (2019) last night, but commenced watching it too late in the evening and fell short of finishing it.  It's also a bit long for a romantic comedy, if you ask me (almost two hours long), so that wasn't helping things.  I only have a half hour left to go and will likely finish it eventually, but likely not in time for it to technically be watched in its entirety by the end of this month.

Alternatively, it's not entirely for lack of opportunity.  Family visited for the weekend earlier this month, and last weekend Husband and I traveled to see family and friends in our beloved old home city.  (I still miss it so much, although now living in our new and also-beloved home city significantly eases the ache of leaving it again.)  That left some other weekends during which movie viewing could theoretically have happened.

At its simplest, this shortfall is due to other emotional and practical demands on my time and energy.

Given the nature of this blog, it is of course absurd and redundant to attest that I love movies.  I love them so very much.  I love the places I get to see movies in our new home.  And yet, there were kind of an inordinate number of demands on my overall life force this month.  Many of those demands were extremely positive, yet nevertheless a lot of work.  Unfortunately, that meant that when there were technically opportunities to go see films, or even to watch something at home, I felt depleted and therefore drawn to entertainment that was less demanding from an emotional, attentional, and time-commitment perspective.  While they may be relatively minor, it is a commitment of time, attention span, and emotional vulnerability to watch new movies.  I really hate to acknowledge it, but sometimes, when I'm feeling particularly drained, watching a film might not be the most skillful approach to self-care for me.

So instead, this month has been a month of reruns.  Husband and I have been primarily watching "Parks and Recreation", which has been a welcome and soothing choice (especially because you know how much I love Aubrey Plaza).  It's been exactly what I needed: to feel pleasantly and comfortingly diverted by a familiar, well-made, and much-appreciated show.

I'm hoping--perhaps not altogether unrealistically--that many of the more intense demands of August will subside at least a bit in September.  I therefore hope to resume movie-watching where I left off in July.  Happily, I've watched so many movies already in 2019 that even taking an entire month off won't meaningfully disrupt my progress toward my annual movie-watching goal.

Looking forward to sharing those with you soon.

{Heart}

How to Survive a "Decade of Fire"

Hey team,

I want to talk about one of the most remarkable movies I've seen this year: "Decade of Fire" (2019).

I feel deeply grateful that I not only got to see this film, I got to see it at my favorite film festival of all time at a screening with director Vivian Vazquez present.

"Decade of Fire" surveys the rampant fires that destroyed whole swaths of the Bronx during the 1970s.  Staggering amounts of devastation unfolded as countless fires engulfed buildings and left whole city blocks in smoldering rubble.

"Decade of Fire" captures the misery, peril, confusion, and fear experienced by the residents of the impacted neighborhoods.  This pain was deepened by the extent to which many people living in the Bronx internalized the profoundly damaging and racist media narrative that the residents of the very burning communities were to blame for their destruction; to hear the news coverage and public discourse tell it, residents of the Bronx were just too neglectful, criminally-motivated, or morally derelict to care for their own homes.

Director Vivian Vazquez and a friend as a young woman.

Investigating and ultimately, rightfully, rejecting this narrative, the film expertly identifies the true culprits that contributed to the devastation.  These factors include redlining of communities of color which caused dramatic decline in the quality and condition of available housing, dangerous and fraudulent behavior by exploitive landlords who paid children to commit arson so they could collect ill-gotten insurance payments often without ever being prosecuted, closing of fire stations in and near the Bronx,  and racist messaging and neglect from the highest reaches of governmental power on down.

Stunningly, residents nevertheless stayed and fought for the Bronx.  They banded together to rebuild, refusing to abandon the communities they loved.  In some cases, they formed radical collective construction teams to reclaim burned-out buildings and transform them into gorgeous and modern housing.

Residents of the Bronx rebuilding.

As Ms. Vazquez fielded questions after the screening, it became clear that it did not escape the audience's notice that the Bronx depicted in Vazquez's masterwork echoed the Baltimore of today.  The comparison is heartrending, as well as its sense of time standing still; the city faces so much despair and hardship, and we have so far to go. 

But just like the people who stayed and fought for the Bronx, and who ultimately victoriously rebuilt the Bronx, there are people with immense heart, resolve, and grit in Baltimore who aren't going down without a fight.  We know that every person living here has value and a voice.  We know what this city deserves and the greatness it is capable of.

There was a moment at a Baltimore Cease Fire event months ago that I'll never forget.  At an event whose central focus was healing and building community in the wake of seemingly relentless violence, there was a response to some people's questioning whether they should stay here that deeply resonated with why we stay and fight, and why these communities and cities are worth fighting for.  First, the person responding made the very important point that abandoning a city like Baltimore is in many ways futile because, "I don't know where you could go that isn't impacted by white supremacy."  And then, in loving and reverent defense of this city, they said, "Baltimore is magic."

Baltimore is magic.  It has no business being beautiful, resilient, brilliant, creative, brave, strong, innovative, poetic, and enduring, but it is each of those things.  White supremacy can't stop it.  Corruption can't stop it.  Systemic oppression can't stop it.  A bigoted and neglectful farce of a President can't stop it. 

Baltimore's magic is powerful.  Those who can't or won't see it have no goddamn clue what they're missing, and good riddance to them.  We get to thrive in that magic whether they see it or not.

You can learn more about "Decade of Fire", including watching its trailer, here.

{Heart}


PS: However shockingly unacceptable it is for a sitting President to be actively racist and disparaging against an American city, I urge anyone reading not to be distracted by only the latest incident of his pathetic misbehavior.

Do not forget that the President's tantrum against Baltimore was precipitated in part by Congressman Elijah Cummings' advocacy for innocent asylum seekers, including many children, who remain in despicably inhumane conditions in detention facilities along our Southern border.

If you're even the slightest bit irked by the President's behavior in recent days, please immediately contact your elected officials to express your outrage at the treatment of our fellow human beings, many of whom are your future fellow citizens.

Just like the 1970s in the Bronx and the Baltimore of today, we'll survive this ugly era.  But only if we fight back.

Snap Judgment: You Don't Have to Be Book Smart to Love "Booksmart"

Hihi,

It's been almost exactly a year since our last Snap Judgment!  We are horrendously overdue for just such a treat.

Let's talk about "Booksmart" (2019)!

• The odds are stacked against it.

"Booksmart" (2019) could by all rights have been a classic (read: boringly predictable) teensploitation movie in the grand tradition of "Breakfast Club" (1985), "She's All That" (1999), and most pointedly last-hurrah-rager-party movies like "Can't Hardly Wait" (1998) and "Superbad" (2007).  To up the level of challenge, the film even follows a pretty standard story arc from last day of school through circuitous-and-wacky-journey-to-party to actual party to party aftermath.

• ...Which makes it ever more the delight!

Given the well-worn territory it treads, "Booksmart" could have been a truly unremarkable movie. 

And yet!  It is one of the most entertaining, charming, fresh, and innovative comedies I've seen in a while!  First and perhaps most importantly, it is genuinely funny.  Its many pit stops in the journey-to-party are fun tangents when they could be tiresome and laborious delayings-of-the-inevitable-arrival at THE party.  Even the closing credits are eminently watchable.

• The movie is intersectionally feminist and this only makes it awesomer (duh).

I love it when a movie proves that you can be repeatedly laugh-out-loud, inventively funny by NOT relying on cheap, predictable, punching-down jokes.  It's only in retrospect that you notice the jokes that weren't made, because you sure as hell don't miss them.

• Great performances partner with a wonderfully humanist ethos.

It's not easy to pull off across-the-board solid performances in a film with a large ensemble cast, but "Booksmart" demonstrates it can be done!  The main characters of Amy and Molly (as portrayed by Kaitlyn Dever and Beanie Feldstein, respectively) are extremely fun and compelling to watch, especially as they navigate fluctuations in their confidence in themselves and in their friendship.  Minor characters like Gigi (played by Billie Lourd), Theo (Eduardo Franco), Alan (Austin Crute), Miss Fine (Jessica Williams!!), and especially George (Noah Galvin) enrich and fully round out the story.

With such a wide cast of characters, it is truly noteworthy that "Booksmart" resists falling into the common-in-teensploitation-movies trap of moralizing and judging about "good" and "bad" people.  While many characters in the movie certainly encounter minor yet survivable humiliations, these serve only to further humanize them rather than serve them their just desserts.  

Instead, in Vonnegut-esque style, every person in "Booksmart" matters.  By the end of the movie, you understand that every single one of the characters in "Booksmart" is a valuable, redeemable, complex human being.  This only deepens the enjoyment of the movie, because it lacks in mean-spirited schadenfreude and instead introduces you to a range of characters, each of whom you get to know and enjoy.

• And finally: Olivia Wilde!!

I have loved Olivia Wilde a whole whole lot ever since my now-distant days of being an inordinately fervent fan of 13 on "House".  She's basically the only reason to watch the reboot of "TRON: Legacy" (2010).  And "Booksmart" is, kind of astonishingly, her feature-length directorial debut!  It is such a victory that I'm stunned she hasn't been doing this for a long time.  I am so looking forward to whatever projects she helms in the future.

Taking all these components into account, it is perhaps not surprising that I gave "Booksmart" a 5.  

...Incidentally, this has nothing to do with the fact that Husband's first comment before we even left the theater was, "You're going to give this a 5, right?"

I strongly recommend that you find "Booksmart" quick before it's out of theaters!

{Heart}