Real Human Bing Movie Thoughts

Who’s Really Invisible?

A strong metaphor about abuse goes a long way to propel this film into compelling heights.

The Invisible Man
Likes: Strong thematic message about how abuse lasts past the initial event and how difficult it is to find believers.
Dislikes: Mileage will vary for enjoyment of the Invisible Man special effects. Also a Saw Easter egg ruined a dramatic moment for me.
Bottom Line: If this is indeed an(other) attempt to kick start the “Dark Universe” franchise, it’s off to a solid start.
4 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆◇

by Jacob Schermerhorn

The best horror/sci-fi tales are the best not because of their imaginative worlds or technology but because of the deeper themes that reach into truths about human nature and society. Dawn of the Dead is really a commentary on consumerism, It Follows is about STDs, Get Out is a dark reflection of the black experience in America, and Rosemary’s Baby is about not taking women seriously and gaslighting them into obedience.

Luke Meeken’s comic on this subject is humorous and insightful.

Leigh Whannell (most know for the Insidious and Saw franchises) wrote and directed The Invisible Man which hues most closely to the last example in that list. Cecilia Kass (Elisabeth Moss) is constantly fighting for people to believe her story and escape from violent relationship. Where it differs from Rosemary’s Baby is with its straightforwardness. The Invisible Man is, ironically, very visible in its message: this film is about abuse.

In the opening scene, Cecilia escapes from her an abusive relationship with Silicon Valley tech-bro Adrian Griffin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen) by slipping out in the middle of night with the help of her sister Emily (Harriet Dyer). After hiding for a few weeks at Emily’s ex-husband James’ (Aldis Hodge) house, news breaks that Adrian committed suicide and left a large sum of money to Cecilia.

However, soon after Adrian’s death strange things start occurring to Cecilia. Breakfast ends up burnt on the stove, doors unlock on their own and important documents disappear during a job interview. As these occurrences grow in number and severity, so does Cecilia’s paranoia and desperation. She is convinced Adrian faked his own death and used his super technology to make himself invisible.

As Cecilia tries convincing friends and family, they all question her sanity and soon she is all alone. Emily and James have theories about her behavior: perhaps it’s leftover paranoia from Adrian’s abuse or maybe it’s an overdose of medication. There are always excuses people make to not trust survivors. (Or, in an era of #metoo, to not trust accusers.)

The metaphor is definitely not what you could call subtle, but it’s probably the best part of this film. Following Cecilia as she spirals further out of control gives the audience a look into how it feels to be a voice failing to be heard over the structural distrust of our society. Whannell should be commended for taking the OG Invisible Man story, which biggest message is “Wouldn’t it be creepy if there was a criminal who was invisible?” and giving it real thematic weight.

Cecilia’s final action (which I will not spoil) gives the character agency and resolution. However, I predict its true meaning, which is a bit ambiguous, will be debated over long after The Invisible Man is out of theaters. I look forward to that discussion and the reaction people will have to this surprisingly provocative movie.

Give this Animated Film a Hand

It’s a coming-of-age type story that would be cliché if not for the beautiful animation and the severed hand.

I Lost My Body
Likes: The animation is stunning, and a worthwhile endeavor compared to a lot of typical stuff out there. The music also deserves a shoutout.
Dislikes: The story beats can feel a bit by the numbers.
Bottom Line: Catcher in the Rye meets The Incredible Journey only there’s a severed hand.
4 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆◇

What does it mean to be severed? To be separated from your body, from yourself?

I’ve been thinking about that concept a lot about recently. The metaphorical implications have stayed with me since I watched I Lost My Body and I think can be emotionally resonant with anyone.

Our main character in this animated French film, Naoufel (Hakim Faris), is severed in more ways than one. From flashbacks we learn he was cut off from loving parents at an early age (tragically, they are listed in the credits simply as “Pere” and “Mere”, as if Naoufel cannot remember their real names) and what looked like a middle-class lifestyle. As a teenager, Naoufel lives in a cramped room with a crass and bullying fellow orphan Rafouf (Bellamine Abdelmalek) and distant foster guardian who demands payment from the boys.

I think it’s not a coincidence that Naoufel looks to be of Middle Eastern or North-African descent. France has a horrid history of colonialism and exploitation in those areas that has bled over into modern day anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic sentiment. Films like 1995’s La Haine and this year’s Les Miserables show that this is deep shatterpoint in the French psyche that unfortunately hasn’t progressed much. While not directly about this subject, by making Naoufel a minority, I Lost My Body severs its main character from truly belonging to a national identity.

Oh yeah. And there’s a literal severed hand that is journeying toward home like Chance, Shadow and Sassy, the animals from Homeward Bound.

The hand itself is animated beautifully and is able to display emotion even with just five fingers and a stump. As it sits on a windowsill, we instinctively know that the fingers are legs hanging over the edge. I Lost My Body’s director, Jérémy Clapin, was very deliberate about this choice and the hand’s characterization.

Per an interview with beforeandafters.com, Clapin said, “I had to be careful to not be ‘scary’ with the way the hand walked, i.e. not too much like a spider or the facehugger from Alien. It was really a challenge to also not be too funny, or cute. I wanted something natural, even though it’s not natural to see a hand walking.”

As scenes shift between Naoufel and the hand, we each character progressing on their journey. Naoufel develops a crush on Gabrielle (Victoire Du Bois), a girl he delivers pizza to and starts apprenticing for Gigi (Patrick d’Assumçao), a woodworker. On the other hand (haha), the hand must navigate through many dangers including pigeons, rats, the subway, an icy river, a blind man and his dog, and much more. It all leads to an emotional climax and a resolution that doesn’t answer, but instead wonders if something severed can ever really be reattached.

https://beforesandafters.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ILostMyBody_featured-1024x431.jpg — Photo: beforeandafters.com
This shows the general process the animators took when creating the animation. The full article is very good and I recommend it.

Not quite as adult themed but in a similar ballpark as the Charlie Kaufman penned Anomalisa five-ish years ago, I Lost My Body didn’t really have a chance at the typically kid-friendly Best Animated Oscar. It definitely deserved to be there though. The process of animation through 3D back to 2D through use of a “grease pencil” tool creates a unique look and feel to the film that typical animated fare doesn’t scratch the surface of.

(No, I’m not throwing shade at Toy Story 4 which had some impressive features in it! Don’t @ me!)

On a totally unrelated note, this is like the sixth Netflix property I’ve done in a row. I’ve been thinking about uniqueness and branding (not that this is anything more than a hobby really) and how typically they tell you to find a niche for your content. Is Netflix my niche?

A Horse (Girl) of a Different Color

Do impressive performances and haunting imagery overcome a muddled theme?

Horse Girl
Likes: Really wonderful performances, especially by Alison Brie, great dialogue, surreal and creepy imagery that stays around after you finished watching.
Dislikes: Is there a deeper meaning to this film? Or is it just here for its own sake?
Bottom Line: Why am I willing to give David Lynch obtuse non-thematic weirdness a pass but get hung up on the messaging in this movie?
4 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆◇

(If spoilers are like horsepies to you, then take another canter around the stable before reading this review.)

“Horse Girl” feels like a millennial phrase that the generation has yet to spotlight or really reclaim in the same way “Nerd” has been reclaimed. (Although doing research does reveal a segment of people referring to “Horse Girl energy” like “Big Dick energy”, sooooooo, does that count as progress?)

To me, “Horse Girl” still seems like a cruel term that people use to describe young girls who are obsessed with horses. Just type in “Horse Girl memes” into google or urban dictionary and you’ll get an idea of the depths people go to. For example, a common trope is “Horse Girls” will neigh and jump around on their hands and feet on the playground. They probably want to be a horse.

(Terminology like that is doubly heartless if you interpret that behavior as indicators of the autism spectrum, a real issue that is underreported or misdiagnosed in female populations.)

But I digress. My main point is that the phrase “Horse Girl” has a lot of negative energy to me, so hearing about a film with that as its title, I’m assuming it’s a downer of a time.

Which is mostly accurate for the Alison Brie helmed Horse Girl. It is a tension-filled trip through a slowly deteriorating mind or alien abduction or something else entirely. It left me feeling uneasy for the rest of the day and thinking about it a week later.

One thing is for sure about this movie, Alison Brie (real last name Schermerhorn) is a true acting force in case you didn’t know.

The first half of the film introduces us to Sarah (Alison Brie). She fits the meme mold of a “Horse Girl” in a lot of ways. Sarah is quiet and introverted, has few relationships outside of her job at an arts and crafts store (Molly Shannon as Joan is great in her role at the store), is obsessed with a Supernatural/Lucifier/Evil/CW fantasy show pitch perfect ripoff titled Purgatory, checks in on a horse she formerly rode, much to the annoyance of the stable staff and current rider, feels guilty toward an accident her friend and fellow “Horse Girl” Heather (Meredith Hagner) experienced, and she dances a mix of Zumba moves and galloping motion when she gets drunk.

She also is still grieving for her mother and has a distant relationship with her (kind-of) stepdad Gary (Paul Reiser). It is heavily implied that her family has history with some kind of mental illness which remains unnamed throughout the film.

Things really start to take a turn after Sarah’s birthday. After a painfully awkward (and relatable, oof…) sequence of Sarah failing to draw up the courage to ask anyone to celebrate with her, her roommate Nikki (Debbie Ryan) invites Darren (John Reynolds) over to their apartment. Its clear that Nikki and her boyfriend Brian (Jake Picking) are exasperated with Sarah and look to pair her up with Darren as a night of drinking and marijuana ensues.

(I just need to insert here that the dialogue at the party scene is among the best at quickly and humorously getting across everyone’s characters. From Brian’s horrible rap album to Nikki’s increasing annoyance but attempted good nature toward Sarah, to Darren’s complaining about an ex-girlfriend, it’s all very well done. This movie was partly produced by the Duplass brothers so dialogue feeling natural but witty is par for the course.)

https://moviepaws.files.wordpress.com/2020/02/horsegirl3.png?w=1024 — Yep, don’t worry, there is a horse featured in this movie.

Sarah dreams after the party she is in a white room with black indiscernible creatures with a man and woman as well as an illuminated platform over the ocean reaching up into the night sky. She wakes to claw marks on the wall and progressively stranger and stranger events. Sarah teleports and loses her car, she imagines people talking in her apartment, she sleepwalks and experiences time loss, she hears the future. After a late-night internet search Sarah becomes convinced she is a clone of her grandmother and that aliens are experimenting on her.

She tries to protect herself using the energy of colors and burning incense, but the incidents keep occurring. Eventually the events crescendo and cross the Rubicon into fully surreal and horrifying imagery. Each of those could, in themselves, be theorized about further, and especially the ending, which at best is ambiguous and at worst obscures the deeper meaning of the film.

Which is where I feel conflicted about my enjoyment of the film. I’m not sure about the message behind this movie. It does certainly feel like a trip through a mentally ill person’s mind, but does it have anything else to say about that? Or is it just here to torture Sarah? Like, weird stuff keeps happening, but if Sarah has no agency or we can’t be sure of her reality, then what’s the point?

Part of me thinks I just haven’t given Horse Girl enough thought yet and maybe there is a deeper meaning to the story. In the week since watching, I have been going over events and symbolism in my head, trying to find something to latch on to and that’s the mark of an interesting movie. So even though the themes are confused, I will recommend watching this movie. Maybe after you’re done, we can discover its meaning together.

Twin Peaks: Monkey Walk with Me

Yes, what you just watched was seventeen minutes of David Lynch interrogating a monkey.

What Did Jack Do?
Likes: This isn’t very insightful when discussing Lynch, but it’s like watching a dream unfold.
Dislikes: This isn’t so always a dislike for me, but trying to gleam any further significance from this work is frustrating.
Bottom Line: It’s like a dream out of the mind of Dale Cooper.
3.5 out of 5. ◆◆◆⬖◇

Some might say (because they’d be just stating facts) that my experience with David Lynch and his style is only through the world of Twin Peaks. Point being, I am not an expert on the guy, but I have come up with some observations that might blow some of your minds. Are you ready?

David Lynch makes weird art.

“Galaxy brain level thinking there Jacob,” I imagine you sarcastically thinking right now. And that’s fair dear reader. It’s no secret that “Lynchian” is a short-hand descriptor for surreal and disturbing imagery. More importantly, the imagery is endlessly interpretable and obscure. Type in Twin Peaks theories and you’ll get millions of results.

People trying to hunt for a greater connection or theory in his art is ironic though because Lynch has never concerned himself with that. The work is there and the audience is left to interpret it. His job is over.

“It makes me uncomfortable to talk about meanings and things. It is better not to know so much about what things mean. Because the meaning, it’s a very personal thing and the meaning for me is different than the meaning for someone else.”
As quoted in My Love Affair with David Lynch and Peachy Like Nietzsche: Dark Clown Porn Snuff for Terrorists and Gorefiends (2005) by Jason Rogers, p. 7

Which makes What Did Jack Do? a classic Lynch project because it is very hard to interpret. What we see in this seventeen-minute black and white project is Lynch, playing a detective, questioning a monkey about a murder. The monkey talks (voiced by Jack Cruz) and wears a suit and tie. (He also sings!) The sound design, something Lynch pays special attention to, transports us to a café or diner near a busy train station.

Jack sings about his love while the Detective looks on.

Characters talk in stereotypical gumshoe lingo and in their back-and-forth, it seems to be slowly revealed that the monkey, Jack, is responsible for a murder of a chicken. The crime was one of passion for his true love, the chicken Toototabon. He is caught in a confession, attempts to run, and is pursued offscreen by the Detective.

That plot summary, like a lot of Lynch’s projects, sounds more coherent than it really is when watching it. Instead, viewing this film is like remembering a dream with logic that is both plainly simple and totally absurd. (Animals are like humans in this world I guess, just go with it) It’s something that kept me enthralled about Twin Peaks and made me keep watching. The way reality suddenly twists into a dream (or nightmare) is incredible.

One of those tricks for twisting reality is oddly enough what I would consider “bad” visual effects. There were a lot of cheap or obviously out of place VFX throughout the run of Twin Peaks, including the newest series. Something about them fit with Lynch’s vision though. Seeing the Giant’s abode in Part 8 or Doppelganger-Diane lifted out of the air after she is discovered would look silly in a Marvel movie, but here, it just works.

The “bad” VFX that just works in What Did Jack Do? is the Jack’s mouth. It looks as if they green screened in human lips for the monkey which clearly do not attach to the rest of his body. Again though, it just makes sense. It adds to the weirdness of the project and the nightmarish quality of the project. I could imagine this as a dream Dale Cooper had while trying to solve the mystery of Laura Palmer.

In terms of greater meaning or thematic understanding, What Did Jack Do? is not a project I feel ready to award. I do know that like the haunting, confusing parts of Twin Peaks, I will probably be thinking about this short film for a while which is a valuable thing. Lynch has given me another weird puzzle to turn over in my mind. Thanks Dave.

The Surprisingly Decent Oscars

This one surpassed my (admittedly low) expectations!

The 2020 Oscars
Likes: Wow, I really wasn’t expecting a foreign movie to do that well. I’m surprised at how happy it makes me.
Dislikes: Lampshading the controversy about your typically out-of-touch voters doesn’t make it go away.
Bottom Line: Are the Oscars important? Yes and no, the most boring and useless of all answers…
3 out of 5. ◆◆◆◇◇

Every year, around the same time, plenty of think pieces are written about the Academy Awards. Does this industry awards show matter? How much money does it take to fuel a “For your consideration” campaign? What kind of benefits do Oscar winners (actors, studios and otherwise) see? Why doesn’t the voting populace resemble the diversity of our modern era?

These notions can end up exploding like the #OscarsSoWhite in 2015-2016, the controversy over Best Picture initially being awarded to La La Land instead of Moonlight in 2017, and a movie about black and white people driving (Driving Ms. Daisy, Green Book) beating out a more pertinent movie about racial tension from Spike Lee (Do the Right Thing, BlacKkKlansman) just to name a few recent ones.

And before this year’s Oscars were awarded, it felt like a really similar moment was coming. Diversity and women in film took a backseat to other considerations this year. Jordan Peele’s Us was a nailbiting horror with social commentary up the wazoo and some incredible dual performances (in particular, Lupita Nyong’o) to boot. No nominations. The Farewell highlighted an Asian experience through a typecast demolishing performance by Awkwafina. No nominations. Jennifer Lopez was a force in the female driven Hustlers. No nomination. Little Women received a few nods in the nomination categories, but not for Greta Gerwig as director. In fact, Cynthia Erivo and Antonio Banderas were the only thing keeping an all-white sweep of acting categories from occurring.

I guess I mean to say by all this is that I wasn’t optimistic about feeling satisfied with the ceremony or the awardees. For a majority of the time, that did stay true. Janelle Monae’s female and minority affirming opening performance felt deflated to me and Chris Rock pointing out the diversity problem seemed like a hollow effort. Like shrugging and just accepting it. (I’m not saying that Chris Rock has to come up with jokes that make us feel better, I think they were actually pretty truthful jokes.) It just didn’t feel great to live in that space where this was the reality. Seeing the same stories over and over.

It was a great performance, it just felt hollow compared to the things that didn’t make it.

But then, against all odds, things started to change. First, Parasite won Best Original Screenplay. A surprise, but this wasn’t totally unforeseen. I expected that to be the only win for the film and I was happy. I thought it was a great work the moment I saw it and was glad other people felt the same way.

It seems like I misjudged other people, because they felt the same way as me a lot more. Parasite went on to win Best Foreign Language Film over some healthy competition. Then Bong Joon-Ho won Best Director which made me sit up straight in my seat. Then the “little South Korean film that could” won Best Picture and I leapt out of my seat and yelled which woke up my dog.

Parasite made history by being the first non-English language film to win the big prize of the night. That accomplishment, silly as it may sound, left me in an unexpectedly happy mood. Its win maybe signifies that the Academy is changing and is open to different perspectives and types of people being seen as worthy. As Bong Joon-Ho himself said while accepting a Golden Globe award, “Once you overcome the one-inch tall barrier of subtitles, you will be introduced to so many more amazing films.” I really hope that this win is a move in that direction. Because that would be a really cool world to live in.

I look forward to what Bong Joon-Ho comes up with next!

A Whole Sack of Fun

Man, they talk about death a whole lot in this Children’s-ish special don’t they?

John Mulaney and the Sack Lunch Bunch
Likes: Both humorous and profound, it never goes for the obvious joke. Also JAKE GYLLENHALL!
Dislikes: Some bits drag on too long.
Bottom Line: If Mulaney makes another one, I’ll watch it, and if he doesn’t, that will also be okay.
4.5 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆⬖

When John Mulaney & The Sack Lunch Bunch opens, you might think someone has hacked Netflix and given you an Errol Morris style documentary instead. Jacob, a kid with an adorable lisp, stares straight into camera and details his biggest fears (swimming) and why (drowning sounds like the worst way to die) in a two-minute cold open to what you thought was a children’s television special.

After all, you saw those fun advertisements with John Mulaney dancing with a bunch of kids, right? Well that’s definitely not how this thing starts. This strange stark talking head is repeated throughout the program with the child actors and the featured actors. (and “unfeatured” actors! – Natasha Lyonne and Annamarie Tendler Mulaney show up too!) The performers often talk about heavy subjects, like fear, funerals, and death.

Some highlights include Cordelia Comando explaining how a therapist forced her to dress up like a clown to combat her coulrophobia, Suri Marrero and Linder Sutton talking about how much Jordan Peele’s movies have scared them, and Andre De Shields giving a powerful statement about not letting fear control our lives.

All of this to say that the motif of talking heads gives what would otherwise be a perfectly enjoyable, silly, comedic variety special a thoughtful and sincere quality. The rest of the special is structured like an episode of Sesame Street with recommended books reviews, fuzzy costumed characters, and lots of music. The talking heads break that structure though and transforms performers into relatable people. It’s a way of deconstructing the trope of the children’s special in a truly unique way. So many projects edge into the territory “Wouldn’t it be weird if children’s shows were F-ed up??” like (although I love it) Brian Huskey with Mr. Neighbor’s House or Jim Carrey with Kidding. Sack Lunch Bunch on the other hand is willing to explore darkness, but not to revel in it. Which ultimately makes it a pretty hopeful piece of work.

But I am getting way weighed down by only half of this TV special. Not only does it have profound “out of the mouths of babes” moments, Sack Lunch Bunch is funny. Like, really funny. Like, “I actually laughed out loud funny” funny.

The dialogue is zippy and witty. John Mulaney is a master at effortlessly slipping jokes into longer speeches. (“A TV show for kids, by adults, with kids present.”) And the kids are just as capable and go beyond “cute-kid” acting into legitimate comedic timing. (“My top New York moment? I’m eating a slice of pizza at the Statue of Liberty. I walk around the corner and who do I see? All of the New York Yankees, and they’re all singing ‘New York, New York’!”) All the kid performers are great and have resumes on Broadway or in Hollywood longer than your arm.

“And her boyfriend’s name is Paul!”

Speaking of Broadway, there is a lot of music in this special. All of them are hilarious concepts and legit bangers. From Grandma’s Boyfriend Paul, to The Algebra Song (Where Andre De Shields as a math tutor convolutely explains the power of math), to Pay Attention (featuring David Byrne!), to I Saw a White Lady Standing on the Street Just Sobbing (And I Think About It Once a Week), and my personal favorite Music Music Everywhere! with a manic and underprepared Jake Gyllenhaal as “Mr. Music” who steals the show. The insane goofy energy he brings is perfect for the song. He’s seriously might be my favorite part of the entire program.

I only say “might be my favorite part” because there are so many other parts to Sack Lunch Bunch. There are entire sections I didn’t even mention that are so great. David Bryne is afraid of volcanos! The reveal that every cast member has an “in memoriam” picture! Richard Kind featured on Girl Talk! So much more! Go watch it! In fact, I’m going to go watch it again too!

Manufacturing Culture

For someone who spent time working in a Chinese company, this documentary hit close to home.

American Factory
Likes: Such a strong style with lack of narration that helps to just observe people.
Dislikes: I wonder if a doc set in 1990’s Mexico or Thailand with an American company coming into those countries would be similar? (I kept thinking this throughout)
Bottom Line: Freshman effort from Higher Ground Productions makes me excited to see what’s next.
5 out of 5: ◆◆◆◆◆

By Jacob Schermerhorn

The 2008 Great Recession devastated much of America, but perhaps no where was more poetically felt than in the Northeast/Midwest Great Lakes region, from Buffalo to Detroit, the Rustbelt. The manufacturing plants closing was like tearing the heart out of a body and all that is left is its shell. The Rustbelt of the 2010’s was (and perhaps the 2020’s will also be) defined by this closure and the tremendous feat of finding a sustainable economic future.

American Factory presents one possible Rustbelt future through a case study of Dayton, Ohio. After the General Motors plant closed in 2008, the city faced an all too familiar recession story with thousands of workers laid off and unable to make ends meet. However, hope emerged when the Chinese company Fuyao Glass started operations in America in 2015. Initial promises and good faith acceptance were strong enough to overrule the ominous lack of a union in this town. Dayton men and women out of work for as many as four years jumped at the opportunity to apply. Over the course of two years, through cultural differences, economic anxiety, corporate pressure, and oftentimes straight-up prejudice, the environment around the factory goes from optimistic to contentious between its American and Chinese counterparts. And it is the change from enthusiasm to suspicion that made American Factory so compelling to me.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/11497182-3x2-700x467.jpg — The question of a union at the factory quickly becomes a major shatterpoint.

With its fly-on-the wall, observational style, this documentary does an excellent job of presenting multiple perspectives. The technique makes each opinion understandable and creates a complex tableau with no clear correct path. The picture becomes like those optical illusions of two ladies kissing or a flower vase.

Two ladies kissing – The Americans see a workplace riddled with safety hazards. Nonexistent gloves or eye protection, extreme temperatures, unsafe forklift operations, improper chemical disposal, the list goes on. All that for low pay (One woman says it is half what she made while GM was in business) a lack of benefits too and an increasingly hostile work environment that intimidates out any discussion of unionizing.

A flower vase – The Chinese see those many of those measures as inefficient and unnecessary and their American counterparts as ungrateful for what they do have. It is revealed that factory workers in China have to work 6 out of 7 days for longer hours and a significantly lower wage. For a country with a population of 1.4 billion, huge economic inequality, and still losing its “developing” status, any job is a good job. Complaining about wages, work hours, health care and safety is pointless.

Quickly those differences devolve to racist and prejudicial judgements being leveled by both sides. Unfortunately, the cultural differences, which are celebrated in a few precious and heartwarming moments (John and Wong’s friendship is so goshdarn touching), instead seem to prove that the sides are incompatible.

While there are many examples, including the most prominent question of union membership, one of my favorites is the roll call. After visiting a glass factory in China, a manager attempts to institute the same procedure in America. The Chinese workers line up in marching order, quickly yell off their assigned numbers, and repeat some phrases rattled off by the foreman. It seems more like a military drill then a factory job, but no one can deny its efficiency. In America, the workers are obviously unreceptive and must be reminded to stand on their number spots. The manager doesn’t even try any call out drills and seems apologetic throughout the procedure. In China, where schools have mandatory days of marching militarily, this procedure must be second nature to workers. America does not have that cultural practice, so of course it fails.

https://www.plasticstoday.com/sites/default/files/american-factory-650.png — Chinese students are required to do military marching drills every year at the beginning of school.

Why does this scene in particular resonate with me? Time to admit something. I worked for a Chinese-Canadian company for three years and it played out so closely to this film. Brief beautiful moments of connection with a majority of division in between. Just like American Factory, the linguistic and cultural differences could result in slight annoyance or outright rebellion. Seeing the parallels between my experiences and the Fuyao factory is disappointing for someone who wants to believe that cultural differences can be overcome.

American Factory is the first documentary from the Obama family’s new production company. But this film is really based on the bones of 2009 doc The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant. The team is no stranger to awards (Last Truck was nominated for a Documentary (Short Subject) Oscar), and they have continued being recognized with a nomination for Best Documentary this year.

A Marriage of Drama and Humor

The complex feelings that come with ending a relationship are raw but funny.

Marriage Story
Likes: Equal parts emotionally devastation and witty humor.
Dislikes: Is it biased toward Charlie? I don’t know, but it kept hounding me throughout.
Bottom Line: If you’ve ever had to end a relationship with someone, then you’ll find something familiar here.
5 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆◆

Marriage Story has an accurate name. It is indeed a story about marriage. Just as easily, this movie could have been titled “Divorce Story”. The process of our protagonists separating is the entire arc of the film after all. But a title change like that, one focusing on destruction, would have taken something away from the message which I think has more to do with what you sacrifice in a relationship, bittersweet memory, and love that is powerful for forgiveness.

The plot of Noah Baumbach’s newest family drama is simple. Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johannsson) are having marital troubles and couples counseling is quickly shown to be unhelpful from the first scene. When divorce becomes a forgone conclusion, the conflict transforms to their son Henry (Azhy Robertson) and where he will live. As divorce lawyers get involved, the situation escalates and long held resentments come out with both characters attacking each other in vicious and seemingly unforgivable ways.

https://moviethoughts.movie.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/cd96e-mscircle.jpg — Talk about visual storytelling huh? You see guys, it’s like a barrier or “gate” is being put between Charlie and Nicole. Genius film analysis going on here.

Even though I have never gone through divorce or been close to anyone going through divorce, I have been in relationships and know what it’s like when differences cause relationships to crack and break apart. Charlie and Nicole breaking apart is strikingly accurate and one of the best things about this film. Charlie wants to live in New York City and direct plays at his art-house theater, Nicole is thinking about Los Angeles and a shift to television instead. Charlie feels like his opinions are obvious, Nicole feels like he’s never really considered hers. Both characters are right and both characters are wrong. It’s brutal but honest and was emotionally draining to watch.

At the same time, there is plenty of humor along the way. Some of my favorites in no particular or exhaustive order: how everyone keeps telling Charlie that California has plenty of space, the uniquely LA chaos of Nicole’s pilot and trendy pool party, Bert Spitz (Alan Alda) as Charlie’s unhelpful first lawyer, Rich Fulcher randomly playing the divorce judge, everything about Nicole’s mom Sandra (Julie Hagerty), the way Charlie’s theater group gossips about him, Frank’s (Wallace Shawn) rambling stories, Charlie’s slowly less convincing insistence that “We’re a New York family”, the way we’re introduced to Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern) apologizing for her “sleppy” appearance when she’s wearing heels, Henry’s desire to be a ninja for Halloween, and the entire scene where Nicole serves Charlie his divorce papers. (I could write an entire piece on the brilliance of that scene alone) The dialogue, which seemed less Baumbach mumblecore than usual to me, and the editing are particularly aligned with some great performances to create very funny sequences.

Ultimately, I think that Marriage Story is a hopeful narrative at its core. It concludes with Charlie and Nicole accepting their situation and including each other in Henry’s life. Their resentful climax was a necessary relief of pressure from the sacrifices at forging a life together and seems far removed now. More importantly, it also seems clear that there is love enough to forgive that resentment. Charlie and Nicole are equally believable as being in love as they are an imperfect match for each other. The bond they formed was not a lost cause and valuable even after marriage dies.

Whodunnit Whoysteria

Rian Johnson delivers another thematically splendid genre movie.

Likes: Tightly wound with everything running like clockwork AND a mystery that you could solve on your own.
Dislikes: Umm, can I put nothing here?
Bottom Line: Even if detective stories aren’t your thing typically, you’ll still enjoy this.
5 out of 5. ◆◆◆◆◆

By Jacob Schermerhorn

(Just like clues in an old creaky house, spoilers abound here so tread cautiously!)

When I was a kid, our family made it a regular tradition of watching Masterpiece Mystery on PBS. Those evenings, I was enchanted by tales of Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, Miss Marple and Nero Wolfe as they solved case after case. Someday I hope bayou accented, eccentric, and hammed-up-to-eleven character of Benoit Blanc can be added to that pantheon of eternal detectives. I would happily welcome an entire miniseries with the character. Alas, I think Knives Out probably is best as a stand-alone story, but headcanons exist for a reason and in mine Daniel Craig’s detective is still rushing off to adventures today.

But maybe fixating on a sequel is like scarfing down a meal without enjoying it and in this case, Knives Out makes for a delicious dinner. Events begin after a famous and successful mystery writer Harlen Thrombey (Christopher Plummer) commits suicide following his birthday celebration. Marta Cabrera (Ana de Armas) Harlen’s nurse is our POV character and protagonist as she simultaneously tries covering up and solving clues through a tense and exciting ride.

For you see, this movie reveals the murder twist early on (Harlen’s suicide is to protect a mistake Marta made) and the mystery becomes as much about obscuring the truth as discovering it. Additional twists are added when Harlen’s will indicates that Marta will inherit his fortune and suddenly the family turns on her.

https://filmschoolrejects.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/knives-out-1.png — The family quickly turns on Marta after the will is read.

The cast is stuffed with talent especially the actors playing hateable rich asshole family of Harlen. Linda and Richard Drysdale (Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson) are “self-made” successes (with a million-dollar loan, wonder where Rian Johnson pulled that number out of?) who are harboring marital stress. Joni Thrombey (Toni Collette) is a hippy Gwyneth Paltrow Goop style influencer. Walt Thrombey (Micheal Shannon) is the sad-sack youngest brother left running his father’s publishing company with his wide-eyed and xenophobic wife Donna (Riki Lindhome) and alt-right troll son. And finally, there’s Ransom Thrombey (Chris Evans), the bad boy grandson who argued with Harlen over inheritance money the night of the suicide. Each family member is a unique but equal style of awfulness that makes you cheer when a final shot reveals a gag with a coffee cup that signifies their comeuppance.

Marta, played by the relatively unknown Armas (she was the hologram lady in Blade Runner 2049!), is the sole character with morals symbolized through a psychosomatic inability to lie without fear of throwing up. This leads to humorous running gags with Blanc using Marta as a living lie detector. But far from being a joke, Marta is the strongest character of all. Her decisions are always to treat people humanly and with kindness. Unlike his family, she cares about Harlen and tries to save housekeeper Fran (Edi Patterson in a role – Yay!) even as it appears she is Marta’s blackmailer. Marta’s heart allows her to overcome the family, solve the mystery, and gain Harlen’s inheritance.

With this film, I can say that Rian Johnson has officially moved up the ranks of directors into someone I will watch regardless of genre or subject matter. I trust his ability to tell a story and appreciate the messages of his movies. If he indeed makes another trilogy of Star Wars films, I’ll be there for that. If he makes another sci-fi thriller like Looper, I’ll be there for that. And if he makes (crossing my fingers so hard) another in the Benoit Blanc mystery series, I’ll be the first in line.

The Force is not Strong with Rise of Skywalker

Faced with the daunting task of ending the entire series, this one plays it safe but boring.

Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker
Likes: Set design, some practical alien effects and some nice lightsaber action.
Dislikes: I really wonder if Star Wars can evolve past the three same families in the galaxy.
Bottom Line: Disliking this movie makes me sad.
2 out of 5. ◆◆◇◇◇

by Jacob Schermerhorn

(Reading this leads to spoilers, spoilers lead to frustration, frustration leads to the dark side!)

This film was saddled with an impossible task straight out of the gate. The ninth and final (for now) movie in the main Star Wars canon had to, just to name a few expectations: give a fitting send off to Carrie Fisher, find a place for Kylo Ren’s character arc to land, deal with the homoerotic tension between Finn and Poe for once and all, give Rey some more jedi training, present a suitable threat to the scrappy heroes, close up storylines and plot arcs, be a satisfying conclusion to a four-year trilogy not to mention a forty-year long non(is that nine?)-ogy, as well as be an enjoyable movie. I get that it would have been hard for any single movie to pull off, the reality is not lost on me. Even grading it on that curve however, The Rise of Skywalker was a disappointment.

The events begin some time after The Last Jedi with characters realizing they need to access another map McGuffin now that a mysterious message proclaims the return of Emperor Palpatine. From there, the plucky jedi-in-training Rey (Daisy Ridley), trooper-turned-rebel Finn (John Boyega), hotshot pilot Poe (Oscar Isaac), along with Chewbacca, C-3P0, and BB8, (No Kelly Marie Tran as Rose much to my chagrin) go planet hopping, swashbuckle some stormtroopers, fight some space battles, all normal fare for this genre, and some of it quite enjoyable.

However, the inexplicable pacing of said events took away a lot of that enjoyment. For example, the introduction of the Emperor is the cold open of the film and takes maybe seven minutes. That is a short amount of time for what fundamentally changes this universe with no foreshadowing in the other two films.

For a movie with a runtime close to two and a half hours, it felt like they were rushing to cram as much as possible in. Which is a shame because I like the new cast. I’d love to dig into what makes any of them tick: character motivation, their relationship to others, hopes, dreams, fear, and so on. But the times we do get that it usually feels too shallow to be interesting.

https://img.cinemablend.com/filter:scale/quill/2/f/6/b/1/0/2f6b104427809067e69224bc0b6922b5dec2440d.jpg?mw=600 — Babu Frick was pretty cool though.

While the pacing kept this from being a good movie, the story decisions kept this from being a good Star Wars movie. Or at least, an engaging one. Emperor Palpatine is back and was behind everything apparently, Rey is his granddaughter, and every star destroyer in the ridiculously large Final Order fleet is armed with “a planet-blowing-up gun” like the Death Star.

Time to come clean to anyone reading, I stan The Last Jedi. I loved that it told a tight, thematically complete story with satisfying metacommentary and a fun experience to boot. It also was finally a movie that challenged the narrative of Star Wars. In the requisite Joseph Campbell’s “Belly of the Beast” scene of that movie, Rey discovered that her parentage was not significant. When she looked in the mirror, she saw only her own reflection. Rey raised herself.

Which is cool. The message that greatness can come from anywhere and anyone is an important one for people to hear and for Star Wars to evolve. The choice Rise of Skywalker made to make her descended from the powerful Palpatine line is what an old Star Wars story would do, not what The Last Jedi seemed to be setting up.

Whereas I walked out of that movie excited to see the possibilities of this universe, Rise of Skywalker reminds me more of that Hans Gruber quote from Die Hard: “He wept because there were no more worlds to conquer.” With the conclusion of this movie, I really can’t imagine any other worlds to conquer in Star Wars. Well, until the inevitable reboot in ten years.

Still, I don’t want to end this off on such a depressing note so instead I will say this to conclude. There is an undeniable magic in Star Wars. Not in the single through-line of canon movies (If that were true, it would have died with the prequels). Instead the magic of Star Wars is the mythic scale and the expansive, unapologetically weird, joyfully adventurous, imaginative universe that inspired so many others to make great things from it. Ever since its inception, good and bad, people have created books, art, tv shows, graphic novels, video games, and most importantly, stories from Star Wars. And that gives me hope for this franchise.

May the Force be with y’all.