Category: 2021 Movie Log

1st: Blood Simple – Joel Coen (1984)
For as acclaimed as the Coen brothers are, I think Blood Simple has become vastly underrated. It’s stunning. It’s so confidently made that it’s almost impossible to think of it as a debut. The cinematography and score are just immaculately done. If there’s a knock against the film, it’s that it can drag for a bit. It’s likely the slowest and most serious film the Coens ever made. But the last act would be worth any wait. I had forgotten a lot of the movie by the time I rewatched this. I didn’t forget any of that final sequence.
Grade: A-
Blood Simple – Joel Coen (1984)

1st: Raising Arizona – Joel Coen (1987)
This is the Coen Brothers’ film that’s never fully clicked for me. I think it’s just a bit too slapstick to fully work. That being said, everything in this movie is impeccably done. Almost every shot has a gag in it. And the opening is one of the best in any movie.
Grade: B
Raising Arizona – Joel Coen (1987)

4th: Burn After Reading – Joel & Ethan Coen (2008)
This may be the Coens’ funniest movie. I wish I could construct something with this much conspiracy and stupidity wrapped together. I almost forgot that this film is a story within a story. Hearing JK Simmons try to make sense of these events is incredible. It’s amazing how stacked this cast is. I forgot about half of the actors that make an appearance.
Grade: A-
Burn After Reading – Coens (2008)

7th: A New Leaf  – Elaine May (1971)
Comedy is hard. Elaine May is obviously one of the best to do it. Films like Tootsie and The Birdcage have remained hilarious years after they were made. I did like this film, but I have to admit that I didn’t find it particularly funny. More than anything, I was charmed by the the two lead performances. It’s a pleasant and easy film to watch. But not one I would put with the best of May’s work.
Grade: C+
New Leaf, A – Elaine May (1971)

8th: The Heartbreak Kid – Elaine May (1972)
I thought most of this movie was on par with the best things Elaine May has done. Her daughter, Jeannie Berlin, is particularly great as the spurned wife. I love how despicable Charles Grodin is in the lead role. It’s amazing to watch. The film loses a lot of momentum once it leaves Miami and the main tension is resolved. To be honest, the entire 3rd act didn’t work for me. Still, for the first 80 minutes I think this could be put up with almost any comedy.
Grade: B
Heartbreak Kid, The – Elaine May (1972)

8th: The Boy Downstairs – Sophie Brooks (2017)
I wish movies like this were better. On the one hand, this film does do a lot of good things. The lead performances by Zosia Mamet and Matthew Shear are endearing. I’ve wanted to see both of them in a lead role for some time. Brooks is able to pull that off here. I also think that she has a good eye as a director. There are some really striking shots in this movie. The main problem though is in the film’s storytelling structure. There’s just no point in using the flashbacks. The whole backstory should have been the film. But if Brooks had constructed the film like that, she wouldn’t have her title and the elevator pitch about someone moving into the same building as their ex. It’s especially frustrating because if she just told the story linearly I think it’d be a lot better.
Grade: C
Boy Downstairs, The – Sophie Brooks (2017)

8th: 10 Things I Hate About You – Gil Junger (1999)
My god is Heath Ledger charming. The entire cast of this film is kind of amazing. It’s really the thing that makes the film work. I wish more movies today would take swings like this. I can’t even imagine what a mid-budget, really ambitious, Shakespeare-inspired comedy would look like today. And yes, there are things that don’t work in this movie. But the parts that do work are so much more exciting than 90% of movies today. I guess what I’m really trying to say is that the 90s were a wild time. I miss the sort of half amazing / half insane movies that came out of them.
Grade: B
10 Things I Hate About You – Gil Junger (1999)

9th: Four Weddings and a Funeral – Mike Newell (1994)
My god is Hugh Grant charming. I can see why this film has the legacy it does. It almost feels designed to be rewatched. I particularly loved the ensemble approach to it. You get a sense of this group’s dynamic, but the film is only able to scratch the surface. I think you would pick up new things about the group each time you watched the film. I do think the film has a major flaw though. Andie MacDowell’s character is not likable enough. You kind of have to accept that Hugh Grant is hung up on her because it’s a rom-com. That being said, Hugh Grant more than makes up for any flaw with the film. He’s unbelievably good in this role.
Grade: B
Four Weddings and a Funeral – Mike Newell (1994)

10th: Fast Times at Ridgemont High – Amy Heckerling (1982)
This is a fascinating movie to watch in 2021. On the one hand, it seems destined to have aged badly. It’s a hyper-sexualized high school fantasy movie. Off the bat, we watch the 15-year-old protagonist lose their virginity to a 26-year-old man. On top of that, there’s gratuitous nudity that’s entirely from a male perspective. Obviously, it’s good that Jennifer Jason Leigh and Phoebe Cates were both adults when they made this. But I think there’s something to investigate about the choice to use two beautiful adult women to play hyper-sexualized high schoolers. On the other hand, movies today have basically stopped featuring sex. And sex is obviously a huge part of high school! If you’re going to make a high school movie, you have to involve it. Especially, if it’s a movie that seems to portray an almost fantastical high school like this one. This is all to say that I quite liked this movie and Jennifer Jason Leigh is a star.
Grade: B
Fast Times at Ridgemont High – Amy Heckerling (1982)

11th: The Edge of Seventeen – Kelly Fremon Craig (2016)
Hailee Steinfeld is unbelievable in this movie. On the whole, the film is good. It’s well-directed, it’s mostly well-written. But none of it would work without Steinfeld’s performance at the center of it. It’s a tricky role. Movies like this obviously require their protagonists to be smart, funny, and likable. After all, we have to watch them for two hours. At the same time, it has to be believable that somebody we like this much would be having such a rough time. There are certainly a few places where you have to suspend your disbelief. While this movie is a far more realistic version of high school than others (Fast Times…) it’s not exactly hyper-realistic. But what can I say? I was quite charmed by this movie. It was nice to see Blake Jenner in something besides Everybody Want Some!!. Woody Harrelson is quite endearing. It’s a solid high school movie.
Grade: B
Edge of Seventeen, The – Kelly Fremon Craig (2016)

13th: Emma. – Autumn de Wilde (2020)
I sometimes wonder how to assess a film like this. Everything about it is well-done. Anya Taylor-Joy is incredibly captivating. It is abundantly clear that Autumn de Wilde is a talented photographer. The compositions and general staging of this film are wonderful to look at. I especially like how vibrant and colorful the film is. There isn’t that stilted “period piece” look to it. It feels as fresh and exciting as if everything were modern. And yet…I just could not sink into it. I admired almost everything about it and still felt kind of bored for most of the movie. Perhaps everything was too precisely packaged? Perhaps there wasn’t enough of a hook into this story? In any case, it’s an interesting dilemma. How can a movie this well-made not work? I wish I had more of an answer.
Grade: C+
Emma. – Autumn de Wilde (2020)

14th: The Mitchells vs. The Machines – Mike Rianda (2021)
Pretty delightful. I loved the film’s almost chaotic tone. Specifically, the way it uses animation to employ flashbacks and asides rapidly throughout the movie. Ironically, my only problem with the film is that its narrative can feel a bit generic or predictable. In some places, you get the sense that this is a movie that’s gone through millions of revisions to get everything just right. It can feel like a movie overworked by a corporation as opposed to a unique and singular vision. 
Grade: B+
Mitchells vs The Machines, The – Mike Rianda (2021)

15th: Zama – Lucrecia Martel (2017)
It’s amazing to me that I didn’t know about Lucrecia Martel. I’ve only seen two films by her, but those two films would lead me to believe that she’s one of the best directors working right now. Zama, like La Cienaga, is an unusual, slow-burning, idiosyncratic film. Each film has a subtle, biting humor that sneaks up on you. To be honest, I’d have to rewatch Zama to get a better sense of it. The way Martel moves through its story feels almost surreal. It’s hard to get a sense of what’s happening until thinking about it afterward. 
Grade: B

15th: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs – Phil Lord, Christopher Miller (2009)
I was kind of let down by this one. I had always heard that it was really good. After watching The Mitchells vs The Machines, I was quite excited for it. Overall, I think this movie is good, but I wouldn’t say exceptionally so. There are places where it feels uneven. I would have liked one or two more narrative surprises in the story. I will say, this movie is leading me to question The Mitchells vs. The Machines a little bit. That film’s ending pretty much copied this one: a tech-illiterate dad has to upload a kill code for their son/ daughter to save the world. Really? They couldn’t have come up with something else? 
Grade: B-
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs – Phil Lord (2009)

18th: Midnight Run – Martin Brest (1988)
One of the best “mainstream” movies I can think of. Almost everything about it is right down the middle. The script follows the beats of a traditional feature to a T. There isn’t anything in this film that’s really risky or subversive. And yet, it’s so good. It works perfectly within its construct. It knows exactly what type of movie it is. There aren’t really any moments to over-dramatize the stakes of what’s happening. One of my favorite parts is how cutthroat Jack remains throughout the whole movie. I think a lesser movie would have really engineered his dilemma at the end of the 2nd act. Instead, he’s the same bitter, sarcastic character as ever. One last thing I’ll say is that I love the scope of the movie. They make it look much easier than it is to have so many moving parts. This movie subtly has about 10 key characters. That they’re all well-written and well-cast makes all the difference. 
Grade: B+
Midnight Run – Martin Brest (1988)

19th: Hell or High Water – David Mackenzie (2016)
Everything is pretty well-done in this movie. It has a tight plot. The heist is small enough where it’s believable they could pull it off. Jeff Bridges is even kind of endearing despite playing a racist cop. But I have to say, this film did not click with me at all. For one thing, it was so obvious that both the brother and the deputy would die. I also suspect that westerns just don’t appeal that much to me. I really can’t believe this was a best picture nominee. Well actually, I totally can. It’s technically excellent and substantively empty. About par for the course for the Oscars. 
Grade: C
Hell or High Water – David Mackenzie (2016) 

20th: Romancing the Stone – Robert Zemeckis (1984)
What a weird fucking movie. Both Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas’ characters are so weird. I obviously know there’d be a romance in the movie, but I couldn’t believe it was with these two characters. I really admire how silly the film is willing to be. It’s refreshing considering how self-serious most movies are today. 
Grade: B-
Romancing the Stone – Robert Zemeckis (1984)

21st: Say Anything – Cameron Crowe (1989)
I kind of loved this. There are a million things that I think don’t work. Cameron Crowe clearly doesn’t understand high school. This should just be a post-college movie. They also don’t really give enough for the Diane character to be on Lloyd’s level. But goddamn is John Cusack charming. It’s really all you need. And because of it, the movie totally works. It makes me think that our generation is really missing movie stars. 
Grade: B+
Say Anything – Cameron Crowe (1989)

3rd: Cléo from 5 to 7 – Agnès Varda (1962)
I think expectations can always be a bit off with a film considered one of the greatest of all time. The first time I watched this film, I was a little underwhelmed. I admired it for its realism and structure, but found it somewhat slow. For whatever reason, I was blown away this time around. To me, this is an almost flawlessly constructed film. I love the way that Varda sets up everything we need to know in the opening tarot card reading. I was particularly amazed by the construction of her shots. So much of this film takes place in mirrors. I’m fascinated to know exactly how she set up these scenes.
Grade: A

10th: Can’t Get You Out of My Head – Adam Curtis (2021)
No matter what you think of Curtis’s argument, this is a pretty singular and extraordinary film. I’ve never seen anything remotely like it. In a sense, it does feel completely galaxy-brained. Not that the arguments that Curtis makes are necessarily false. Just that he moves between these arguments so quickly using all 480 (!) minutes of run-time before putting it together. What’s interesting is that there are several arguments that Curtis makes that I plainly disagree with. He uses an example of a trans woman in 1970s Britain as an example of how when individuals step out of a society they are inevitably defeated. To me, that seems like a somewhat grand conclusion based on one instance. But that, more or less, is what Curtis uses all of his examples to do. They’re all part of a larger argument that goes something like: Most (if not all) collectives are corrupt and it takes an individual to step outside of them, but individualism is equally as problematic. What’s more interesting to me though, is that I’m not sure that agreeing with Curtis really matters. I think the ultimate goal for this film is to spur independent thinking. If that end is promoted from disagreeing with Curtis, so be it. The opening and closing quote the film uses almost says as much, “The ultimate hidden truth of the world is that it is something we make and could just as easily make differently.” Even in what I have just said, I feel a million contradictions that I need to correct. I think to actually get any type of grasp on this film, you just have to see it. From seeing it once, I know that to really get a firm handle on it, I’d need to see it again.
Grade: B+

11th: Shiva Baby – Emma Seligman (2020)
I found myself almost resisting this movie for most of its run. It is overwhelmingly unpleasant to watch. But somewhere around the halfway mark, it turned for me. Not that the movie gets any easier to watch. But I found myself really admiring what Seligman was doing. I think I finally caught up to what the film’s wavelength. She shoots this exactly like a horror movie. There are close ups, quick cuts, strange angles. It’s pretty remarkable. I don’t know if I’ve seen a mix of genres work quite like this before. 
Grade: B
Shiva Baby – Emma Seligman (2020)

15th: Shirley – Josephine Decker (2020)
This is one of the strangest biopics I’ve ever seen. To be honest, I don’t even know if it qualifies as a biopic. It seems to me like a lot of the events in this movie must have been invented. Either way, I still think it’s pretty good. Between Madeline’s Madeline and this film, it’s clear that Decker has a unique vision and plenty of talent as a filmmaker. Her approach actually reminds me of Emma Seligman’s in Shiva Baby. Decker shoots her films as surrealist horror films even though they’re primarily focused on (somewhat) ordinary characters’ psyches. I think there are a few things that don’t really work in the movie. Or rather, I should say that I don’t think everything in this movie adds up as it should. Still, between the direction and the central performances, this movie is more interesting than most other films. I’m excited to see what Decker does next.
Grade: B
Shirley – Josephine Decker (2020)

17th: Daguerréotypes – Agnès Varda (1976)
As a fan of movies about “real life,” this movie is right up my alley. It’s literally a documentary about Varda’s street, Rue Daguerre. Of course, nothing is ever that simple. There are all sorts of interesting questions. How much are these real people “performing” because they’re on camera? What conversations and encounters are staged? What’s the line between documenting with compassion and something more nefarious (like exploitation, indulgence, or condescension)? I think the answers to these questions, and whether the film works is ultimately up to the viewer. To me it works though I’m not sure anybody else could have pulled it off besides Agnès Varda. 
Grade: B+

17th: Hard Eight – Paul Thomas Anderson (1996)
There is so much to like in this film. It’s well-directed. It’s extraordinarily well-cast. Literally every part is played by an actor at the top of their field. This film is also quite strange. I’m not sure if it knows what it is for most of its run-time. In fact, the film seems to shape-shift into something else about every twenty minutes. I also think there’s some immaturity when it comes to the writing and portrayal of Clementine. Obviously, PTA only got better from this film. Still, it’s an impressive debut. 
Grade: B
Hard Eight – Paul Thomas Anderson (1996)

18th: Inherent Vice – Paul Thomas Anderson (2014)
With the massive caveat that I have not read Inherent Vice, this is a damn good Thomas Pynchon adaptation. The film is really able to capture the vibe, conspiracy, and general insanity of a Pynchon novel. Moreover, it’s able to do so and still work as a coherent movie. Maybe coherent isn’t the right word. Like Pynchon’s novel, this film’s plot makes little sense. Still, I think Anderson is able to convey that in a highly enjoyable way. Pretty groovy stuff. 
Grade: B+

19th: California Split – Robert Altman (1974)
Every time I watch an Altman film I think he has to be the greatest director ever. I should obviously just finish watching the rest of his movies. California Split is already one of my favorites even among a stacked filmography. It almost reminds me of something like I Love You, Man. This fells as though it could be the 70s prototype of that movie. California Split obviously has all the complexity Altman brings to it. A loose plot, a blurred sense of time, questionable (but delightful) characters. My favorite part of the movie is just the general atmosphere. But what really blew me away was the ending. In any other movie Bill and Charlie would have kept riding this hot streak and lost all their money. Here, they keep winning which presents its own problems. 
Grade: A-
California Split – Robert Altman (1974)

20th: Honeyland – Tamara Kotevska, Ljubomir Stefanov (2019)
I did not expect this film to be so punishing. I thought it was going to be mostly about bees. In all seriousness, this film is good. It’s amazing to me how much of a story / plot Kotevska and Stefanov are able to get. For the most part, it has the beats and arc of a traditional feature. I almost couldn’t believe when Hatidže’s neighbor stole her bees. It’s so evil. I’m amazed it was captured on film. As I’ve started to watch more docs, I’ve become fascinated with how they’re made as opposed to just the subject. Obviously, Hatidže is incredibly endearing. Still, I think where I’m most interested is the ethics of making a film like this. 
Grade: C+

22nd: The Long Goodbye – Robert Altman (1973)
More evidence that Altman is the best to ever do it. The Long Goodbye is actually the first Altman film I ever saw. I liked it quite a bit then but I’m not sure I knew what to make of it. Until you watch more of his films, the sound mixing, the loose dialogue, and the blending of genres are all fairly new. Watching it this time around (perhaps with more of an expectation of Altman’s style), I thought it was a masterpiece. I’d put it up against anything Altman (or anybody else) has done. The patience with which he tells this film is remarkable. More than anything though, this film works because of Gould’s performance. I typically think of Altman as the master of the ensemble drama. This is a reminder that he could still make great movies centered around one character.
Grade: A
Long Goodbye, The – Robert Altman (1973)

24th: Ripley’s Game – Liliana Cavani (2002)
I was wary of this film for its first half. The pacing felt rushed. A lot of its exposition was forced. I wasn’t sure how I felt about John Malkovich’s performance as Tom Ripley. Perhaps unfairly, I kept comparing the movie against The Talented Mr. Ripley. While I don’t think this film ever gets quite that good, I did end up liking it. In particular, I thought Ripley’s emergence into the action and the home invasion were both really well executed. Also, it’s just pleasant to watch anything set in the Italian countryside.
Grade: C+
Ripley’s Game – Liliana Cavani (2002)

25th: Strangers on a Train – Alfred Hitchcock (1951)
Bruno Antony might be the most frightening villain in a Hitchcock film. The scenes of him following Miriam, and then later Guy, are absolutely terrifying. This would probably be the most fun Hitchcock film to unpack psychologically. There’s so much going on! There’s the way that Hitchcock portrays Miriam as somehow deserving or (as Mr. Morton says) underserving to be killed. There’s Bruno’s entire character. He loves his mother, hates his father. I think there is some suggestion that he could be gay. Overall, I think this would be in the second or third tier of Hitchcock films. There are some pacing problems especially as the movie races toward its close. The cutting back and forth between Bruno and Guy is almost comical by the end. But the film never stops working even when it gets a little silly. 
Grade: B+
Strangers on a Train – Alfred Hitchcock (1951)

26th: The Grand Budapest Hotel – Wes Anderson (2014)
To me, The Grand Budapest Hotel is the culmination of everything Wes Anderson has done. I obviously like all of his movies quite a bit. I don’t think any of them come close to approaching the greatness of this one. The Grand Budapest Hotel just feels like a perfect film for Anderson’s style in every way. It’s the perfect merging of plot, sensibility, tone, and performance. I’m always amazed at the complexity of the story. There are so many layers to the narrative in this movie, and yet, it is flawlessly written. I wish I had more to say. Really though, I’ve watched this movie probably four or five times and each viewing I pick up new pieces. It’s an incredible film. 
Grade: A
Grand Budapest Hotel, The – Wes Anderson (2014)

27th: The Lady Vanishes – Alfred Hitchcock (1938)
What a strange movie! It’s almost a straight comedy for the first thirty minutes or so. Things do pick up once the plot kicks in. Still, there are moments of humor and levity throughout. The general structure is fascinating to me. For the first thirty minutes, I would have guessed that the two Englishmen would be the protagonists. I don’t think you realize that the movie will be a romance until about halfway through. I really did like this film quite bit. Maybe just because of how unusual it is. It’s clear that Hitchcock understands that having fun is as important as the general mystery. 
Grade: B+
Lady Vanishes, The – Alfred Hitchcock (1938) 

28th: La ciénaga – Lucrecia Martel (2001)
This had been on my watch list for quite a while. It did not disappoint. The comparison I keep coming to is Altman. Martel introduces us to this large family without going to great lengths to define each person or relationship. She, for lack of a better phrase, lets you feel it out. For most of this movie, I was trying to parse out exactly how two characters may or may not be connected. The result is that by the end of this film you almost feel a part of this extended family. You begin to understand the dynamics at play here. It’s something that really defines the setting of this film. Martel does as good a job as I’ve ever seen at capturing a place and time. It’s a pretty remarkable debut. I’m excited to check out her other work. 
Grade: A-

29th: Rope – Alfred Hitchcock (1948)
This feels like an entire movie of macguffins (a term that Hitchcock coined). The plot starts out seeming almost a bit absurd. Two men carry out the perfect murder just to prove that they can do it. They then invite over the victim’s family and friends for a dinner party just to heighten the tension and excitement. It makes for a film and characters ripe for psychological analysis. It also allows Hitchcock to film basically in one place. Despite these seemingly absurd constraints, the film ends up transcending all of it. Its premise is so twisted and evil, it’s really amazing to watch. I don’t think it’s the best of Hitchcock’s films, but it has to be one of his most interesting. 
Grade: B
Rope – Alfred Hitchcock (1948)

Shorts 
L’opera-mouffe – Agnès Varda (1958)

Les Dites Cariatides – Agnès Varda (1984)
Les Dites Cariatides Bis – Agnès Varda (2005)

Le Lion Volatil – Agnès Varda (2003)


2nd: The Wolfpack – Crystal Moselle (2015)
This documentary was billed as the story of an eccentric group of brothers who reenact movie scenes as a way of engaging with the outside world. And while that is certainly part of it, I think it undercuts the real subject that Moselle is exploring. While this doc does highlight the Angulos’ fanatical love of movies, it focuses most closely on the circumstances of this family’s upbringing. Maybe it’s a given, but we quickly learn that those circumstances have been pretty dark. It’s not what I was expecting from the clips I had seen of these brothers recreating scenes from Pulp Fiction and Batman. I do think the film is much better for Moselle’s approach to this story. It’s hard to really assess this documentary as a piece of filmmaking separate from its subject. With no disrespect to Moselle or anyone who worked on the film, most of what works about the movie is this family. You get both the horror of the abuse they suffered, and also the humanity that shines through as they tell their story. They’re funny, charming, completely unique, and just bursting with life. It’s a real thrill to watch as they slowly explore the world outside of their apartment.
Grade: B 

6th: Varda by Agnès – Agnès Varda (2019)
The start of my dive into Agnès Varda! I loved this film. It’s like the greatest TED Talk ever. It’s really as good an introduction as you could have for a filmmaker. On one level, this film is a staged lecture of Varda discussing her career and her work. On a second level, this lecture (and film) is also actively being made by Varda. It’s a documentary with her as both the viewer and the subject. Finally, the film is interspersed with moments of cinematic flourish and recreation. Varda interviews former collaborators. She recreates scenes from her films. You learn who she is both by what she is telling you and how she is telling it to you. Incroyable!
Grade: A-

7th: La Pointe Courte – Agnès Varda (1955)
According to the Criterion’s companion booklet, Varda had only seen ten films in her life when she decided to make La Pointe Courte. What in the actual hell? It’s not like this film is even some weird, half-baked, first try either. It’s great! There are shots in this this film that feel like a precursor to Ingmar Bergman’s Persona. There are moments that resemble a Mike Leigh film. One of the central plots is a direct forbearer to the Before Trilogy. Now, to be clear, it’s not like Varda was coming out of nowhere. She was already an established photographer. For as much as I like all aspects of the film, I would say the shots and compositions are the standout feature. Plus, Varda had Alain Resnais edit the film together. So there was obviously an abundance of talent behind this film. Perhaps it’s fitting that Varda went into this movie with little formal film knowledge? Like the rest of her career, she’s able to blend genres and styles here in a way that’s completely her own.
Grade: B+

10th: Molly’s Game – Aaron Sorkin (2017)
I was hoping this movie was going to be good. I like Aaron Sorkin. I like a lot of the actors. Poker movies are generally pretty fun. Although I remember it getting mixed reviews, it does seem to have found a second life. On top of that, I liked Sorkin’s most recent movie, Trial of the Chicago 7, which also got mixed reviews. Unfortunately, Molly’s Game doesn’t have the same luck (or skill if we’re talking poker). It’s pretty rough all around. The plotting and stakes are off, Jessica Chastain’s Molly isn’t likable or sympathetic, and Sorkin keeps pushing some type of morality onto this movie that I don’t think really exists. To be fair, there are a couple of vintage Sorkin exchanges but it’s really the only thing that saves it from being a total disaster. 
Grade: C-
Molly’s Game – Aaron Sorkin (2017)

11th: Coming to America – John Landis (1988)
This is the hardest I’ve laughed in a long time. I have to be honest, I was kind of nervous about this movie. I know it’s a classic, but a lot of the other classic National Lampoon / SNL styled comedies have not aged that well. Plus, this one’s about a fictional African prince. Now, I know I’m the last person who should examine the political correctness of this movie, but if anybody’s curious, I thought it held up incredibly well. And from just a comedy standpoint, this movie is fucking hilarious. I was cackling throughout the first half it. The 2nd half is still good, but much less funny. That’s generally the way it goes for comedies.
Grade: A-
Coming to America – John Landis (1988)

12th: David Byrne’s American Utopia – Spike Lee (2020)
It’s a bold move to make a concert film when you’ve already made the best concert film in history. Especially considering that Byrne uses many of the same songs as he did in Stop Making Sense. Fortunately, these songs are some of the best ever written and they easily hold up in another iteration. Across the board, I thought this concert was unbelievable. I love the songs, the band sounds amazing, and the choreography is incredibly compelling. I even thought Byrne’s spoken passages and the general themes of the show were moving. There are one or two lulls, stretches in which you wait for the next Talking Heads greatest hit. But really, I thought this was the best concert film I’ve seen in a while. Which is where I’ll say that Spike Lee does an amazing job filming this. I loved the way he cuts to perspectives in the audience. I love how he frames so many shots so you can see people dancing in the crowd. I was honestly kind of shocked by how dynamic the filming is. He circles the stage and weaves between the performers. It’s striking but perfectly complements this performance. 
Grade: B+

13th: Paris is Burning – Jennie Livingston (1990)
I can’t think of another film in which so much of the impact has to do with what’s not on screen. Just taking in what we see, there is an enormous amount to digest. This film sets out to profile the ball and house culture of 1980s Harlem. But from this focus, Livingston is able to touch on aspects of trans and queer culture, race and racism, homophobia, the widening class discrepancy of the 1980s, and eventually, the looming AIDS crisis. Incredibly, she does all of this in just 75 minutes. In just what’s presented on screen, the aspect that stands out most are the people. We meet the most prominent figures of this movement, all of whom are incredibly charming, funny, and witty. They share their greatest aspirations and stories of their struggles. There are a couple instances in which we see them attain the success they dream of. Willi Ninja, for instance, becomes a prominent dancer and choreographer. More often, we don’t see these successes. In the most devastating sequence of the film, we learn of the unsolved murder of one of the subjects, Venus Xtravaganza. But what my mind keeps returning to is what Livingston doesn’t capture in this film. Mainly, the AIDS crisis which eventually kills most of the film’s subjects. In many ways, it completely changes the meaning and impact of the movie. It’s one thing to hear the hopes and dreams of these people. It’s another to hear them all while knowing that many will die in the next few years. I don’t mean this in a general way either. Many, if not most, of the film’s subjects did die over the following few years. Moreover, some of the subjects in this film were unhappy with Livingston and the film in general. There are certainly complicated identity politics happening in the making of this movie. Livingston is a white person making a documentary about an almost entirely Black group of people. As you can tell, this is going to take me a while to process. Still, I thought it was an incredibly impactful piece of filmmaking. 
Grade: B+

14th: Let the Sunshine In – Claire Denis (2017)
This film explores a subject I’ve never really seen on-screen. It follows Isabelle as she navigates dating, sex, and love as a recently divorced, middle-aged person. I really admire how biting Denis is in this film. It’s one of the most unflattering movies I’ve ever seen. I don’t think anyone comes away looking good in it. That applies to Juliette Binoche’s Isabelle as much any one. Binoche is obviously an extraordinary actor and is able to garner some sympathy for the character through her performance. But it’s not much. For me, this is where the movie falls a bit flat. It’s so cutting, it’s hard to feel that much besides relief when it’s over.
Grade: B-
Let the Sunshine In – Claire Denis (2017)

15th: Crip Camp – James Lebrecht, Nicole Newnham (2020)
This is easily the most moved I’ve been by a movie in some time. I was on the verge of tears throughout. What is remarkable about it is that it’s not played for this type of sympathy. There are no cheap tricks or attempts to engineer a wave of emotion from the audience. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. This documentary highlights the landmark achievements made by disability advocacy groups and specifically those that emerged from Camp Jened. The reason I was moved by the film is because it is so overwhelmingly affirmational. We get a portrait of this camp, of a world in which these people are finally allowed to just be themselves. It’s moving because in watching it, you see just how much has been taken away from them. It makes you furious as you watch them have to fight so hard and for so long for what should already be theirs. Something that I really admired about the film is the way it subtly lays out how to carry out a successful movement. We see these people come together at camp and realize how the world should be. They then go out to advocate for this policy. They find a bill in which to include it. Once it’s passed, they then have to advocate for the government to enforce it. I am by no way endorsing the cruel system through which they have to navigate. But it does lay out a blueprint of how to carry out action in our fucked-up society.
Grade: B+

16th: Sound of Metal – Darius Marder (2020)
I wasn’t sure how I felt about this movie for most of its run time. As a baseline, I thought it was well-made and that the performances were great. And to my limited knowledge, it seems to handle deafness and disability in a thoughtful and considerate way. I really liked the first half of the film. I thought the sequence in which Ruben first loses his hearing was particularly amazing. I loved seeing the actual process of him and Lou trying to figure out what to do. I also loved that this film skips the part in which Ruben struggles to fit into the rehab community. For a moment, I thought that was going to be the main tension of the film. But suddenly the film fast-forwards and we see Ruben thriving. The problem with the movie for me is after this moment. As soon as Ruben contacts the doctor’s office, you more or less know what will happen the rest of the film. Which is a shame because the first part of the movie felt so unpredictable. This is all probably coming off as more negative than I intend. I just thought this movie was going to be great. At the end of the day, it’s pretty good. 
Grade: B
Sound of Metal – Darius Marder (2020) 

20th: The Muppet Movie – James Frawley (1979)
I know that The Muppets weren’t made just for kids. Still, I feel a little strange reviewing something that is certainly aimed toward children. There are many things I love and admire about this film (and The Muppets in general). The jokes are incredible. I am particularly fond of Fozzie’s magnificent introduction, “Here I am, Fozzie Bear, to tell you jokes both old and rare. Wocka Wocka Wocka!”  The characters are obviously endearing. I love all the cameos. I certainly did not realize or remember Orson Welles’s role in this film. Not to mention that this film features an unbelievable soundtrack. It’s amazing that “Rainbow Connection” became a legit hit song! Still, my point remains that anything I can say about the movie now is much less meaningful than what I would have said as a kid. Luckily, my impression of the movie is about the same as it was when I was 10: I loved it.
Grade: B+
Muppet Movie, The – James Frawley (1979)

21st: Tangerine – Sean Baker (2015)
Surprisingly enough, I first saw Tangerine in film school. Who knows, if more of the curriculum had been based around films like it, I might have stayed. Sean Baker is one of the most interesting filmmakers working. He makes films whose settings and characters are determined by real life. In keeping with that approach, he even casts many non-actors in his films. Watching the movie last night, I was struck by how fine a line he is walking. In this instance, he’s a white man making a film about two Black, trans, sex workers. And although I’m not the person to make this determination, I don’t think the film is exploitative. That all comes down to the portrayal of its main characters, Sin-Dee and Alexandra. It’s not that Baker focuses on two people who are rarely seen in the movies that works, it’s that these characters have life and personality beyond any stock characteristics. They feel like dynamic, real people. Which is where I’ll say that beyond all the big things that make this film interesting (the plot, setting, and characters), the success of it really boils down to the small things. It’s well-written, features amazing performances, and (if you can get past the iPhone of it all) looks pretty good too. 
Grade: B+
Tangerine – Sean Baker (2015) 

22nd: American Factory – Julia Reichert, Steven Bognar (2019)
I’m amazed that this documentary was made. I still can’t believe the access and (seeming) transparency Reichert and Bognar got to Fuyao. It’s really something to watch as these American and Chinese workers struggle to come together. It’s stunning when we how the executives at Fuyao are dictating the terms of this relationship. Overall, I think this documentary is fascinating. I agree with most of its politics. Yet, there’s something that makes me leery of it. Perhaps I’m just suspicious that Reichert and Bognar could get this type of unfiltered access to Fuyao? Perhaps I’m wary of the Obamas’ role in this film? There’s nothing I can point to and say “this was done wrong.” Still, I have a bit of unease about something in this movie. It’s probably just the robots.
Grade: B-

23rd: Free Solo – Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi, Jimmy Chin (2018)
I am almost certain that I will never watch this film again. The final stretch of it, in which Alex Honnold does a free solo climb of El Capitan, is some of the most stressful filmmaking I’ve ever seen. I loved how the film kept cutting back to the cameraperson’s own reaction as it was happening. Honestly, I’m surprised by how much I liked this documentary. I expected it to have breathtaking footage. I knew that watching someone do a free solo climb would be incredibly dramatic. Still, I’m not sure I expected everything else to be done so well. I particularly liked how the filmmakers inserted themselves into the movie. We watch as they discuss their own relationship with Alex, the effect that filming him during a climb could have, and especially how they’re preparing for a worst-case scenario in which Alex falls and dies. I think this film is a really interesting exploration of mortality. I’d love to read or see more about the ethics in making something like this. 
Grade: B+

23rd: The Great Muppet Caper – Jim Henson (1981)
I would say that across the board this is a step down from The Muppet Movie. The jokes aren’t as sharp and the songs aren’t as good. Still, it’s pretty entertaining to watch. I love the Hollywood spectacle Henson brings to it. It’s fun watching these muppets navigate a film of big sets, stages, musical numbers, etc. 
Grade: B-

24th: Another Round – Thomas Vinterberg (2020)
In the wrong hands, this movie could have been pretty bad. The premise is so broad that you can almost see the terrible American version of this movie. Luckily, this film is pretty wonderful. What I think really works about it, is that Vinterberg sticks out his premise to its logical conclusion. In the aforementioned (not yet existent) American version, we would probably have the same set up: four middle-aged colleagues and friends take up continuous drinking as a social experiment. From there, however, I’d imagine the film would devolve into wild, drunken shenanigans. Vinterberg, instead, takes this premise and tries to play out what would actually happen. It’s wonderful to watch as Martin and this group succeed with their experiment at first. We watch with horror as they continue to up the dosage. Then we see how quickly everything crumbles. For as wild as its premise is, this part feels true to life.
Grade: B+
Another Round – Thomas Vinterberg (2020)

25th: El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie – Vince Gilligan (2019)
When I first watched this film, I praised it for essentially being three great Breaking Bad episodes rolled into a movie. However, that was my assessment after not having seen Breaking Bad since it left the air in 2013. Watching it after bingeing the series, I have to say it doesn’t quite rise to that level. Which, to be fair, makes sense. Breaking Bad is maybe the greatest series of all time. Its stretch-run was as close to impeccable as you can get. Moreover, how could you have a great episode of Breaking Bad without Walt, Skylar, Hank, Marie, Saul, or Mike? My point is that El Camino is good, but it’s not that good. I should say, everything in this movie is, of course, extremely well-done. The performances, the writing, and the direction is all top notch. Frankly, Gilligan is as good as anybody at what he does. But there are some elements that don’t work perfectly. The movie has to employ flashbacks to include the other Breaking Bad characters we want to see. It strikes me that this movie is in a kind of no man’s land. It’s not at the level of the best Breaking Bad episodes and it’s not really capable of being a standalone movie. Still, this is two more hours of Vince Gilligan and Aaron Paul exploring the Breaking Bad universe. I would be a fool to complain about it. 
Grade: B
El Camino- Vince Gilligan (2019)

27th: Boyhood – Richard Linklater (2014)
Unfortunately, this is not going to be a review so much as a rant. I suppose I’ve reviewed and talked about this movie enough anyway. Still, as someone who keeps a film journal and uses sites like Letterboxd, IMDB, and Rotten Tomatoes, I have to say that film criticism and discourse has gotten pretty stupid. It feels like it’s gone from a tool to unlock and explore films more deeply to something to quickly justify whether or not you liked a movie. Now, maybe I’m even using it in this second way to defend Boyhood (I am). But it’s incredibly frustrating to me that Boyhood, of all films, has become a somewhat divisive film. This is a technically innovative, independent, character drama filmed over 12 years on a tiny budget that didn’t even win Best Picture or Best Director. Why is this the lightning rod? To me, good film criticism comes from assessing a movie on its own terms. In other words, did this movie accomplish what it set out to do? A movie can both work and not be your cup of tea. A movie can also really speak to you and not totally work. So when I see people complain that Boyhood is too slow or too limited in focus, I don’t know if I think that they’re actually assessing the movie. I think maybe it’s just not for them. Which is fine if you actually approach it in that way. There could be a really interesting discussion about whether or not this film connects with people. I should also say, some of the criticism I’ve seen about this film is 100% valid. It would certainly be wonderful to have movies like this that chronicle the lives of women and people of color more closely. There are some films that I love that do this (one example being Celine Sciamma’s Girlhood released in the same year). However, to me, to make a quick dismissal of Boyhood for chronicling the life of a boy is pretty stupid. Like what did you expect? And if you want to direct your vitriol at a movie for chronicling the life of a white dude, I would say to look at some other films released that same year. Boyhood was made independently for $4 million. In that same year, Captain American: Winter Soldier, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, and Guardians of the Galaxy were each made for over $200 million a piece. You see what I mean? Hopefully, the next time I watch this movie, I can just focus on whether the movie works as its own entity. 

ETA: Reading back through this is pretty embarrassing. I should be better than to make arguments against a generalized, undefined point (i.e. Boyhood being a lightning rod). You know why it’s a lightning rod? Because people like me feel the need to always talk about how good it is. Catch-22, I guess. Still, I’m going to leave this post up because I think my points about film criticism, and about Marvel getting away with everything are generally true, even if not spoken to particularly well. 
Grade: A

28th: Minari – Lee Isaac Chung (2020)
It’s kind of crazy that not only does something like Minari exist, but that it’s a major movie this year. It feels spiritually in the lineage of Moonlight in that way. It’s a small, beautiful portrait of an America not often seen in the movies. Historically, when there’s a movie made about immigrants or non-white people in America, it is mostly about race and racism. This movie focuses so closely on this family, that overt racism is not even a major part of the film. In fact, while Korean identity is a major part of the film (much of the film is in Korean), I would say that this movie is most prominently a family drama. I think where Chung and this movie really excel is in its smallest moments. There is some great screenwriting here. I’m thinking of the use of the snake that David and his Grandmother see. She tells him that things that are hidden are much more dangerous than those out in the open. It serves as a thematic link throughout the film. It’s even the line she repeats when she has a stroke. Still, you (or at least I) wait for this literal snake to actually strike. It never does. Instead, there is a series of metaphorical snakes that strike: the burning trash, the tension between Jacob and Monica. Even at the end when things look (somewhat) optimistic, Jacob and David are at the Minari creek. This is the place David first saw the snake. It’s no coincidence that it’s hidden. Danger is always lurking. 
Grade: B+
Minari – Lee Isaac Chung (2020) 

29th: Mustang – Deniz Gamze Ergüven (2015)
A stunning movie. I can’t believe how rapidly its tone shifts. Despite the circumstances, this movie starts out as being fairly light-hearted. That the 2nd half becomes as tense as any movie I’ve seen is an amazing achievement. Remarkably, none of this feels disjointed or out of place. Ergüven uses these lighter moments to attach us to the characters and set up the stakes of the film. We watch as basic freedoms are slowly taken away from them. By the time things really go dark, it feels natural. Overall, I’m blown away by the perfromances and the writing. I’ve already had to go back and watch a couple of sequences a 2nd time to understand how Ergüven pulls it off. 
Grade: A
Mustang – Deniz Gamze Ergüven (2015)

30th: Kajillionaire – Miranda July (2020)
This may be the strangest film I’ve seen in some time. While I liked it, I don’t know if I ever got a handle on just what was happening. It almost reminds me of a David Lynch film in that way. It feels at times like July is communicating on her own wavelength. I can’t say this film emotionally hit me the way I was hoping. Still, I thought it was well done. July is as unique and exciting a filmmaker as there is. There aren’t many other directors who can make films like nothing you’ve ever seen before. 
Grade: B-
Kajillionaire – Miranda July (2020)

Shorts
That One Day – Crystal Moselle (2016)
Toby Dammit (segment of Spirits of the Dead)  – Federico Fellini (1968)
Les 3 Boutons – Agnès Varda (2015)
Ô saisons, ô châteaux – Agnès Varda (1958)
Du côté de la côte – Agnès Varda (1958)
Les fiancés of the Bridge Mac Donald – Agnès Varda (1961)

Soul – Pete Docter (2020

1st: Soul – Pete Docter (2020)
If you are not a Marvel fan (yet another Disney company), the idea of a big-budget, mainstream movie in 2020 is likely depressing. I’m sitting here and I can hardly think of the films I’ve watched over the past few years with a budget over $100 million. There are the handful of Marvel movies I’ve seen, the run of recent Star Wars sequels, and the Fantastic Beasts / Harry Potter extended universe. These movies mostly range from inexplicably terrible (Crimes of Grindelwald, Rise of Skywalker) to good (Black Panther). While there are certainly a few standouts (Rouge One, The Last Jedi), even these can be so broad and homogenous it’s hard to get really excited about them. My point is that it feels like a miracle that a movie like Soul is actually great. Honestly, what Pete Docter is able to do here (as he did with Inside Out) is remarkable. Soul is funny, moving, surprising, and deep. It is, of course, extraordinarily well-executed. How could it not be? I’m sure a team of 100+ people worked on this movie. But it is also a film that feels like it has a distinct and singular voice. I wouldn’t even say I’m the biggest Pixar fan in the world, but it’s clear that they’re able to do something that, for whatever reason, almost all other major franchises and studios won’t: be interesting (The exception to this being their rival animation company, Studio Ghibli). I know I’ve spent most of this review praising what Soul does as a big-budget movie, but I’d also like to take the qualifiers off of it. Soul is flat-out one of the best films I’ve seen in a while. The writing in it is incredible. I love the parallel tension that carries the movie: Joe needing to get back into his body, 22 needing to stay in it. I love the ambition and scope of Docter’s vision. This is a film that successfully tackles the question of what is your life’s purpose. Even the way the film conflates “spark” with “purpose” is remarkable. It’s one of the best 3rd Act complications I can remember. On top of all of that, the movie is a blast! It’s so funny and full of life. I really just loved it, something that is rare for a movie of any size.
Grade: A
Soul – Pete Docter (2020)

4th: Michael Clayton – Tony Gilroy (2007)
I first watched Michael Clayton a few years ago. If I remember correctly, I reviewed it positively but was more measured in my praise than I expected. All I had heard was that this was one of the best films of the 21st Century and that in a year that featured No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Gone Baby Gone, Atonement, and other standouts, that this was arguably the best of the bunch. Now, having rewatched it without these expectations, I think it’s easily one of the best films of the 21st Century. Funny how expectations factor into your reception of things, huh? And for as much as I admire the performances, the score, and Tony Gilroy’s direction here, this is a writer’s movie. In fact, I would argue that it’s one of the best written movies in recent memory. The structure and plotting of Michael Clayton is impeccable. It’s so well set up and dramatically staged, you’d think it was based on a play (minus the car bomb). Parts of it play out like To Kill a Mockingbird or A Few Good Men. What struck me most about it though, is how every single piece of writing seamlessly connects to something else in the film. Ordinarily, having the exposition about the kid’s book would be too on the nose. But when you do it perfectly, like Gilroy does, it’s magnificent. First, you have this book (about a collective dream) which the kid wants to use to connect with his father. Then you have the fact that he makes this connection instead with Arthur, who is trying to connect with anybody about this conspiracy. Finally, you have Arthur use this book (posthumously) to communicate the conspiracy to Michael which only happens because Michael recognizes the book from his son. It’s incredible! I even think things like the media-res beginning, which I normally would dislike, are perfectly executed here. Again, it’s just writing at the highest level.
Grade: A-
Michael Clayton – Tony Gilroy (2007)

6th: Juliet of the Spirits – Federico Fellini (1965)
In a lot of ways, Juliet of the Spirits feels like a fun-house mirror version of 8 1/2. 8 1/2 is a film about an adulterous director working through writer’s block, depression, and whatever else by exploring versions of his past and fantasies of his present. Juliet of the Spirits is about a woman processing her husband’s infidelity by communing with spirits who present her with visions of her past and fantasies of her present. 8 1/2 is in black and white and from the husband’s perspective. Juliet of the Spirits is in color and from the wife’s perspective. I enjoyed a large part of this film almost as much as 8 1/2. Along with La Dolce Vita, this is the most visually stunning Fellini film I’ve seen so far. The colors, of course, go a long way toward that. Watching this film, it’s strange to think that Fellini’s work up until then had been devoid of them. They play such an integral part to the construction of this film. Giulietta Masina is, as always, magnificent. Her face is incredibly expressive. This role, as opposed to La Strada and Nights of Cabiria, unfortunately forces her to mostly be restrained. She is reacting to the spectacle on screen as opposed to inhabiting it. Still, this movie does not work without her. In general, my only complaint would be that the dreams and fantasies in this film feel thin compared to those in 8 1/2, especially as the film nears the 2.5 hour mark. Toward the end I felt myself wishing for one more major development or revelation to tie things together.
Grade: B
Juliet of the Spirits – Federico Fellini (1965)

6th: Mr. Jealousy – Noah Baumbach (1997)
This may be stupid, but after rewatching Kicking and Screaming and Mr. Jealousy, I find myself wishing for Baumbach to return to these types of films. To be clear, the Noah Baumbach that makes films like The Meyerowitz Stories and Marriage Story is a far superior director than the one that made these films. But these early movies are so unbelievably funny to me. That last qualifier is important. The story and humor Baumbach covers in Mr. Jealousy (as in Kicking and Screaming) is hyper-specific. It’s about upper-middle class, pretentious, artistically-inclined young men who are defined by their insecurities. In this movie Lester, the protagonist, is seen with three books. They are: 1. A collection of short stories by another character who is a stand-in for David Foster Wallace. 2. A Baseball Almanac. 3. Gravity’s Rainbow. Talk about feeling represented by a movie! There are certainly issues with this film. The women only feel real because Annabella Sciorra and Marianne Jean-Baptiste are so, so good (It’s really a shame that Sciorra was forced to leave acting. Watching performances like this, she just seems like a movie star.) And as I just said, the scope of the film is incredibly limited. But, if you can move past that, this movie is so funny. I wish there were more films like it.
Grade: B+
Mr. Jealousy – Noah Baumbach (1997)

7th: Shoot the Piano Player – François Truffaut (1960)
The premise of Shoot the Piano Player is brilliant. We follow Charlie / Edouard, a character defined by hyper-passivity, as he is drawn in again and again to conflict. I really love the way that Truffaut unfolds the events of the film. You don’t realize the full scope of what’s happening: the burglary, Edouard’s past, his hesitancy with Lena, until the end of the movie. By the time you’re up to speed, it’s too late. The characters are in a shoot out. I thought Pauline Kael’s piece in her book I Lost it at the Movies was really insightful about this film. Particularly about how Truffaut is blending genres like slapstick, melodrama, and crime to reflect something that feels like life. My only lament is that a lot of the films Truffaut is drawing upon for inspiration are ones I have yet to see.
Grade: B+
Shoot the Piano Player – François Truffaut (1960)

8th: Promising Young Woman – Emerald Fennell (2020)
I was mildly disappointed through the first two acts of this movie. I didn’t think it was bad by any means, but I was fairly underwhelmed. My main frustration was that for how cool of an idea this story is, it was executed in a way that was frustratingly predictable. For instance, it was obvious as soon as Bo Burnham’s Ryan shows up that the 2nd Act would end with him being implicated in the attack on Cassie’s friend. The other frustration I felt was that this film paints in really broad strokes. I don’t even mean that in terms of the story or the film’s content. I am sure that the depiction of men in this movie is more or less accurate. I mean more that some of the choices that Fennell makes, from the film’s color palette to the music queues, were just jarring to me. However, it is here that I say I was completely wrong. The last act of this movie is not only great, it pays off on everything I was just complaining about. I really feel like the film intentionally kind of lulls along only to knock you out with its ending. It’s phenomenal! Moreover, it’s an ending that I don’t think Fennell could achieve without the tone she sets early on in the film. It reminds me of Once Upon a Time in…Hollywood in terms of how much the ending changed my entire perception of the film. I think that sometimes when you have such a good high-concept idea it can be hard to actually execute a good movie from it. For as radical as this idea sounds (a woman pretending to be drunk to lull rapey men into revealing themselves) you kind of get it in the tag line (see also the final episode of I May Destroy You and the U.S. Girls song, “Velvet 4 Sale” for other examples of this idea). I’m impressed that Fennell was able to turn this into a film that not only executes the idea but transcends it. One final thing! Someone should give Bo Burnham an actual romantic-comedy lead part. He’s so charming!
Grade: B
Promising Young Woman – Emerald Fennell (2020)

10th: Barking Dogs Never Bite – Bong Joon-ho (2000)
Okay, massive spoiler alert right away: I can’t believe Bong Joon-ho made a movie about actual dog killing. Isn’t that a main rule of cinema? Never actually kill the dog. And here, one of the two main characters literally throws a dog off of a roof. It’s insane! The craziest thing about it all is that this movie fucking rules. It may be my new favorite Bong Joon-ho movie (again with the exception of Parasite). There are very few debut features I can recall that are this assured. The closest comparison I can think of is something like Bottle Rocket. Honestly, I think the only place where this movie falters is in its set-up. It takes about 30-35 minutes for the movie to really start rolling. I probably would have cut the janitor’s expository story about Boiler Kim. But really after this scene, the movie is masterful. It’s startling, well-written, incredibly well-directed, and insanely funny. The midpoint chase and the ending rescue of the dog are two of the best sequences I’ve seen in some time. What a movie!
Grade: A-
Barking Dogs Never Bite – Bong Joon (2000)

12th: Framing Britney Spears – Samantha Stark (2021)
I think this documentary is undoubtedly successful in its goal. I actually was surprised by the breadth of the film. It does a pretty amazing job at highlighting how awfully Spears was treated by the media and the public at large. There’s a couple things working against this being a “great” documentary. One is that it was put together as this case is ongoing. In other words, it’s able to highlight the hypocrisy and general unjustness of the conservatorship but can’t do much beyond that. Two is that because of the nature of the documentary, they can only play like 10 seconds of Spears’s music. My general feeling was that while this was pretty good, the 5-hour version with Spears’s cooperation in like 2030 will be amazing.
Grade: C

13th: Judas and the Black Messiah – Shaka King (2021)
Watching this is the most I’ve missed being in a movie theater through this whole pandemic. It really feels like the type of film I would pay to see multiple times while it was out. I suppose that just means I can stream it again. Which is great, but I do feel like we’re missing out on the experience of seeing this on the big screen in a theater full of people. It feels like a movie that demands that type of screening. Really, what can I say? From a filmmaking standpoint, I don’t know what else you could want? Daniel Kaluuya and Lakeith Stanfield’s perfromances are the reason we have movie stars. They’re utterly captivating. I felt like I could run through a brick wall during Kaluuya’s speeches. On its own, it’s just a brilliant, provocative, and almost flawlessly executed movie. Then you factor in the historical nature of it too. I’ve been spending the past couple of months reading Howard Zinn’s A People’s History…One of the major themes of that book, and especially in the chapters that cover this time period, is how the government works to co-opt revolutions in order to neutralize them. Either that, or they work (semi-) covertly to just execute revolutionary leaders. Which is not the easiest message to convey, especially in a country that refuses to look at history honestly. And yet, I feel like this movie distills this message and presents it as a complete statement in a matter of two hours. It’s really the type of film that reminds me how powerful movies can be.
Grade: A
Judas and the Black Messiah – Shaka King (2021)

20th: Death at a Funeral – Frank Oz (2007)
This reminds me so much of an Altman film. It has the same style, and to a degree, even the same sense of humor. Now that I think of it, it’d really make a nice double feature with Altman’s A Wedding. Like many of Altman’s films too, this is a slow burn. I knew this was one of Gioia’s favorite films so I was really waiting for the film to click. However, I would say it takes about 30-45 minutes for that to happen. The film isn’t bad before this point, but there are so many characters and situations to set up, it’s just not abundantly clear exactly what this film is. But once you hit this point, boy does it start to roll! There is just an insane amount of absurd situations happening right on top of each other. It’s wonderful comedy. The last third of the film, especially, is wickedly funny. It more than makes up for a slow start. 
Grade: B
Death at a Funeral – Frank Oz (2007)

21st: Nomadland – Chloé Zhao (2020)
There was a moment early in Nomadland in which I was afraid that this was going to be more of a news report piece than a great film. Which is something that doesn’t even have to do with the political message of the film, but rather, how Zhao was going to deliver it. I was fearful after an instance of a character speaking bluntly about the economy and the difficulty of landing and keeping a job. I don’t know? I think it happens at an Amazon warehouse too. For that moment, it just felt too on the nose to me. Luckily, any fears I had were misguided. In fact, I think the writing, design, and especially the messaging of this film is what’s so brilliant about it. It is anything but on the nose. There is this amazing balance in the film between our perspective of Fern and the characters she encounters. While Zhao doesn’t give us explicit statements on Fern’s life, we see sentiments mirrored in the lives of the other characters. For instance, many of these characters vocalize their nomadic lives as a positive choice. And yet, we also know that Fern is not in this situation by choice. That she lost her home and that this was the best option she had. You’re left to wonder about the other characters and whether many of them are also just making the best out of it. I love how Zhao mirrors this sentiment specifically in Swankie’s storyline. There are basically three scenes that outline her impending death: when she tells Fern she’s sick, when she sends her a video from her travels, and when the group mourns her. Yet in all of these instances, we see a celebration of Swankie’s life and the things she’s been able to experience on the road. It’s devastating but also incredibly affirming of life. Which is more or less what I thought of the entire film: incredibly sad but overwhelmingly beautiful.  
Grade: B+
Nomadland – Chloé Zhao (2020)

23rd: One Night in Miami – Regina King (2020)
I hate to admit it, but I was a bit skeptical of this film through the first 30 minutes. Through the first act of the film, something just felt off about the portrayal of the four central characters. I think I’m so used to seeing broad characterizations of these men (particularly Cassius Clay and Malcolm X) that it was jarring to see any emotion or detail that ran contrary to what I knew. Through much of the film, for instance, Malcolm X is gentle and unsure of himself. A sharp contrast from the fiery man of conviction that I’m more used to seeing. The same goes for Cassius Clay. Though he’s arrogant, it’s in a young almost innocent way. Again, a far cry from the man we think of in images like this. For a minute, I was nervous that these portrayals were, well, bad. They’re not. In fact, I think these portrayals are brilliantly subversive. To me, it’s what makes the film work. It is a mechanism for us to actually understand these men as people, and not just as the symbols we’re already familiar with. This movie gives us a picture of who these men are when they’re not speaking to white people. They have anxiety, questions, and doubts. They’re four extremely powerful and influential figures, but they’re also human. Aside from the fact that the entire film takes place in one location, it’s not hard to figure out that this was originally a play. It’s phenomenally written. I love the way the film lets us see interactions between each pair of characters without it feeling convoluted or gimmicky. I also love the moments of levity in the film. With any biopic, I get nervous that the film will dull any edges or life from the characters in order to elevate them. Again, what this film does so exceptionally well is show that these characters are actual people. As such, there are jokes, missteps, and all the normal failings of daily life. It’s a wonderfully nuanced film.
Grade: B+
One Night in Miami – Regina King (2020)

24th: Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom  – George C. Wolfe (2020)
Another night, another adapted play! I don’t think you can start anywhere but with the performances. Chadwick Boseman and Viola Davis, in particular, are able to inhabit these characters so fully that you forget that they’re movie stars. It’s an idea I kept coming back to in watching this final performance by Boseman. Almost every role he played, from Jackie Robinson to T’Challa, was incredibly significant and yet he managed to blend into all of them. For being an enormous movie star and actor, he seemed to also be a bit of a chameleon. It’s a tragedy that we won’t see any more performances from him. As for this film, being adapted from an August Wilson play, it’s of course well-written. The tension builds and builds until it explodes. I love the way the story positions the locked cellar door. When Levee finally does break through it, it’s just a narrow alley. There’s no outlet for him. All of his frustration and anger is trapped in this basement and will have to resolve itself there. The only thing I can knock the film for is just that I think it’d work better on stage. The writing centers on these long and powerful monologues. It’s something that doesn’t translate as well on screen where it’s too easy to get distracted.  
Grade: B-
Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom – George C. Wolfe (2020)

25th: Atlantics – Mati Diop (2019)
This had been on my watchlist pretty much since it came out. Having seen it, I have to say I was way off with my expectations. To be clear, I liked it. But I certainly did not see it becoming a zombie movie halfway through. Which, by the way, I think is a really smart twist. Overall, that’s more or less my impression of the film so far. It’s strange, a bit slow, and subversive. I’m almost still processing exactly what this movie was as opposed to how I feel about it. It strikes me as a film that would be rewarding to watch again. However, there were plenty of things I did admire in a first viewing. When the detective is introduced, for instance, a mirror is present for the entire scene. Later, we’ll see that mirrors are the devices Diop uses to show Souleiman as he inhabits the detective’s body. I also liked how Diop lets the tension of the movie change. For a while, you think it’ll be a conflict between Souleiman and Ada’s husband over Ada, a classic romantic triangle. However, once the mystery aspect of the film commences, Diop just lets this thread drop. Ada’s husband literally leaves without putting up a fight. I’m excited to see what Diop does next. Her direction in the film is really assured. It may just be the connection she has to her, but this film really did remind me of Clare Denis’ work.
Grade: B-
Atlantics – Mati Diop (2019)

27th: Saint Maud – Rose Glass (2019)
I’m glad that I don’t have to give a rating to this film right away (I suppose I don’t have to give a rating to any film at any time, but you get it.) On the one hand, I think it’s a pretty well-made horror movie. It’s visually striking, the performances are compelling, and it has some truly visceral and upsetting sequences. I honestly will never forget the tacks / nails in the shoes. So, what else could you want from a horror film, right? On the other hand, I keep coming back to this thought of “What does this movie have to say?” It’s a tricky question that I’m not really sure is fair. If I were to knock this film for (as I feel) not really having a point of view about anything, what’s to stop me from doing that to dozens of other films. What does The Exorcist have to say about anything? What was Midsommar’s point of view? You see what I mean? Still, aside from the tacks in the shoes moment, there’s not a whole lot that feels exceptional to me about this film. It’s certainly a good movie, but perhaps not a standout one. 
Grade: B-
Saint Maud – Rose Glass (2019)

28th: Skate Kitchen – Crystal Moselle (2018)
I had been meaning to watch this ever since finishing Betty. This is the film that Moselle used to launch that TV show. While the actors and themes are largely the same, the story is different enough that Skate Kitchen is its own distinct thing. And as with Betty, I love what Moselle is able to do here. Whether it’s her direction, the subject matter, or this specific group of actors, I found this movie to be incredibly endearing. For what it’s worth, I do think Betty is a small step up from this movie. Still, there is plenty to like here. I thought the decision to focus on Rachel Vinberg’s Camille was wonderful. She’s able to capture that feeling of joining a new group so beautifully. I’m excited to see what Moselle does next, whether it’s the new season of Betty or an entirely different project. 
Grade: B+
Skate Kitchen – Crystal Moselle (2018)

28th: The Trial of the Chicago 7 – Aaron Sorkin (2020)
I have to say I did like this movie. I had seen some mixed reviews and I’m curious as to what parts of the movie people didn’t like. My guess would be with the tone, which is understandable. A lot of this film can feel like a version of The West Wing. To that point, the film is actually outright funny in some places. Which, given the subject matter, is certainly a choice that Sorkin is making and maybe doesn’t earn. And even as someone who liked the movie, I don’t think the ending really works. It has all the effects of a grand finale: slow motion, the judge shouting for order, swelling music, but maybe not quite the feeling. Still, I thought this was one of the more enjoyable movies I had watched in a while. Perhaps I’m nostalgic for these types of films. Like I said, I thought the movie was often funny and I quite liked all the perfromances. Gioia made the point that she probably would have liked this a lot more if it weren’t based on a true story. I think that’s totally valid. As just a movie though, I liked it. 
Grade: B
Trial of the Chicago 7, The – Aaron Sorkin

Three Colours: Red – Krzysztof Kieślowski (1994)

A quick note as I embark upon the third year of this movie log: For the foreseeable future, I am going to refrain from grading films. I’ve developed the bad habit of thinking about how I’ll grade a movie as I’m watching it. I would like to get back to being as present as possible while viewing something. I’ve also realized that grading things in the moment (or at all) is hard! There are plenty of films that I think are perfectly executed, give a great grade too, and then discover they don’t stick with me. On the other hand, there are plenty of films that are messy and imperfect that I find myself thinking about weeks or months later. So for now I’ll just give my thoughts. It should still be clear whether or not I’m responding positively to a film. Just maybe not whether I think it’s a B or A-.  

2nd: Three Colours: Blue – Krzysztof Kieślowski (1993)
I think it’s fitting that to break-in my new Blu-Ray Player (thanks Mom and Dad!) we chose Blue. I have to say that this film was pretty different from what I was anticipating. Given the plot (a woman dealing with the untimely death of her husband and child) and its critical reputation, I expected this to be a heavy, weighty, emotional film. Perhaps something along the lines of Manchester by the Sea. But I have to say that I wasn’t very moved (or at least upset) by this movie. I liked it quite a bit but I found myself more mesmerized than anything. This film and Juliette Binoche are hypnotic, almost numbing. I wonder if the film is meant to mirror her character’s own grieving process? It’s strange and removed, but always compelling. I would be inclined to call the film messy, but that would feel like an insult to Kieślowski’s masterful direction. This film looks and sounds incredible. Its just the story that’s loose, surprising, and sprawling. I’m excited to see how this could possibly factor into a trilogy. Stay tuned. 
Grade: A-

3rd: Three Colours: White – Krzysztof Kieślowski (1993)
Man, I do not know what to make of Kieślowski or this film series. I’m kind of shocked at the popularity and critical reputation this trilogy has. To be clear, I think it deserves it. These films are wonderful. But they are also strange, removed, and subversive. Blue was a tragedy that was beautiful, but as I noted, didn’t necessarily move or devastate me. White seems to be the comedic version of this. There are some incredible jokes and gags, and yet I don’t know if I’d necessarily call it a comedy. There were only a handful of times in which I actually laughed. Moreover, these all occurred at brutal moments for its characters: Karol stuffing himself in a suitcase, the fake killing of his friend, and Karol’s own faked death. Something that really interests me, but I am just scratching the surface at, is the political representation in this film. Karol is a stand-in for Poland, Dominique for France. What Kieślowski is trying to say about this relationship…I’m not sure. I just don’t have that background knowledge. I’d love to revisit this film with that context though! Honestly, I’d like to revisit this film anyway. It was a good time. 
Grade: B+

4th: Old Boyfriends – Joan Tewkesbury (1979)
There are a couple of unbelievable sequences and shots in Old Boyfriends. Particularly the John Belushi sequence as well as the bathtub scene at the end of the 2nd act. The downside is that the rest of the film is too slow, meandering, and messy to really come together. That should feel like a poor critique of a Joan Tewksbury movie. She wrote Nashville, a film that is not only slow and meandering, but also one of the greatest movies ever made precisely for those reasons. But something about this movie just doesn’t take off. As a viewer, you don’t feel rewarded by the looseness or sprawl. Instead, it makes the characters, and in particular Dianne, feel unexplored.  As opposed to Nashville, the ending here doesn’t feel momentous. It just feels like a place to stop. 
Grade: C-

7th: Three Colours: Red – Krzysztof Kieślowski (1994)
My immediate reaction is that Red is my favorite of the trilogy. I liked them all, but I thought this film was especially excellent. My view of it being the best could easily change. It certainly has a lot going for it from a first-reaction standpoint. It wraps up and ties this trilogy together brilliantly. I’m sure some of my affection for it is precisely because of how well it pays off on promises made in the other two films. It is also the least subversive of the films. It’s the one in which Kieślowski is most willing to solicit emotion from the audience. It’s pleasant and moving in ways that aren’t even attempted in the first two films. I suppose whether it’s my favorite or my least-favorite of the trilogy doesn’t matter all that much. Each of these films is brilliant. The series is a real achievement. Moreover, it’s a type of film and film-series that I’ve never seen before. These films are masterful and meticulously detailed (Red in particular mirrors events in its characters lives in extraordinary fashion) and yet almost impossible to pin down. I’m glad I took a leap in buying this trilogy. I know that I’ll revisit it often. 
Grade: A

9th: Tenet – Christopher Nolan (2020)
God I wish this movie were simpler. It’s hard to do anything with it. I want to pan it because it’s incoherent and unentertaining. But I also think that’d be unfair. In a lot of ways Tenet reminds me of Denis Villeneuve’s Enemy, a film to which I didn’t really respond but still gave the benefit of the doubt because it was Villeneuve. What I’m trying to say, is how would I feel about this movie if it weren’t made by Christopher Nolan (and I like a lot of his movies already, I just think they tend to be illogical)? But taking Nolan out of it, Tenet is strange, ambitious, and visually stunning. It’s also a movie that you really have to work at. Those are all features I generally like. But because it’s Nolan, I’m questioning whether there really is any deeper meaning here. If I watched this movie 5 times, would I discover it as a masterpiece? It’s a legitimate question. The problem with this film though is that it’s so stilted, I can’t imagine watching it even one more time. 
Grade: C-

10th: The Peanut Butter Falcon – Tyler Nilson, Michael Schwartz (2019)
What a beautiful film. It’s disarming, charming, surprising, and really just a pleasant watch. I loved the portrayal of Zak. I think anyone who watches it would have to agree that this is the film’s central achievement. I haven’t seen anything quite like it. The opening with him breaking out of the retirement home is a particularly inspired moment of characterization. I thought the casting around Zak was excellent as well. Shia LaBeouf and Dakota Johnson are just really, really good. They’re able to sell a level of warmth and earnestness that this movie doesn’t work without. If there’s a critique, it’s that the movie feels a bit thin at times. It only runs at about 90 minutes and there are still at least three montage sequences that fill significant chunks of time. It’s not the worst problem, but I found myself wishing for just a little more to it – whether that would be another storyline, character, or what, I’m not sure. 
Grade: B
Peanut Butter Falcon, The – Tyler Nilson, Michael Schwartz (2019)

11th: Fighting with My Family – Stephen Merchant (2019)
While I have never cared about wrestling, I am a sucker for sports movies. Luckily for me, Fighting with My Family leans heavily into that formula. It’s a decision that I think works mostly for the better, though there are some weak spots. Let’s start with the good. Florence Pugh is incredible. I would watch her in anything. I do think it’s laughable that a plot point in this movie is that her character is supposedly unattractive. Besides that, the movie does a great job of letting her shine. Really, I think the entire cast is good. They’re funny, charming, eccentric. It’s easy to understand and root for them. Broadly, the movie is well-written and well-directed. The beats all work. There aren’t any major holes. Even though it can feel a bit generic, it does everything at such a high level that I don’t really mind. Now for the bad. This movie feels like propaganda for the WWE at times. They are really laying it on pretty thick in some scenes. Maybe it wouldn’t be such an issue for me if this movie wasn’t produced by the WWE, but alas it is. Likewise, I think the movie is just missing an ounce of surprise or subversion to really shine. But for what it is, it’s pretty good and that’s coming from someone who still couldn’t give a shit about wrestling. 
Grade: B-
Fighting with My Family – Stephen Merchant (2019)

12th: Variety Lights – Federico Fellini, Alberto Lattuada (1950)
I wasn’t sure what to expect going into this. The only other Fellini films I’ve seen are 8 1/2 and La Strada. As it turns out, Variety Lights feels like a halfway point between them. To be honest, I think I enjoyed it even more than those better-known Fellini works. The spirit here is freer and looser. It might not have as profound things to say as La Strada and while certainly ambitious, it doesn’t carry nearly the same scope as 8 1/2. But Fellini still does a remarkable job of expressing and capturing the joy of performance in this film (even if all the characters in this film are poor and miserable). It reminded me of some classic Hollywood movies. I don’t think, for instance, it’d be crazy to watch this as a double feature with Singin’ in the Rain. I guess what I’m trying to say is that to me, this was almost the perfect balance between being an art film and being a commercial entertainment. What a way to start my Fellini journey!
Grade: B

14th: The White Sheik – Federico Fellini (1952)
Okay, so in some ways this feels more like Fellini’s debut than Variety Lights. Not that Variety Lights was lacking for anything. In fact, I think the opposite is true. It was polished and executed in a way that few debuts ever are. Which makes sense considering Fellini was a co-director on it. And from what I’ve read, it sounds like the experience was almost an apprenticeship for Fellini. The White Sheik, by contrast, is smaller, a little messier, and certainly not as polished as Variety Lights. It has more of the typical scrappy energy of a great debut. In fact, at times Fellini’s instincts for comedy and spectacle almost overwhelm the constraints of the film. That sounds like a negative but it’s something I really admire. This film is bursting with energy. The amount of life here is actually kind of amazing given the extremely limited scope of the film. The story and drama of The White Sheik is exceedingly simple. It would probably be a sitcom episode in today’s world. We have two stories. One follows Wanda as she attempts to make a quick and secret sojourn to meet the White Sheik, a hero from a series of romance novels. In this attempt, she gets caught up in the excitement and romance and is taken away from the city. Meanwhile, we follow her new husband, Ivan, as he covers for her mysterious absence with his family and freaks out internally over her disappearance. Honestly, I kind of can’t believe how well this story works as a feature film. It’s a reminder that if you have enough going for you in every other aspect of the film (the performances, the comedy, the spectacle) you can get by with a pretty simple story. Maybe it even works better that way.
Grade: B+

16th: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb – Stanley Kubrick (1964)
A couple of years ago I went to see Barry Lyndon in theaters for the specific purpose of watching the film with as few distractions as possible. Although it has the legacy of a masterpiece, it also has a reputation for being slow, methodical, and precise. I feared that if I were to watch it at home, I would find myself reaching for my phone by hour two. This was not a concern watching Dr. Strangelove. While it has the same director and critical reputation, it couldn’t function any more differently as a viewing experience. Strangelove is fast, loose, and incredibly funny. It seemed to me that Kubrick paces it intentionally this way to mirror the mania happening in the script. In one instance, Group Captain Lionel Mandrake attempts a call to the president in order to provide the code that will avoid the missile attack and nuclear annihilation. It’d be the climax of any other film. The next cut reveals that both the call and the code were successful. We don’t even see it. The main tension, for now, was resolved entirely off screen. Perhaps the most striking part of Strangelove is Kubrick’s focus on the actors. The performances are absurd and extremely showy. They’re at the center of this movie even more than Kubrick’s direction or script – something that, as far as I can tell, doesn’t happen anywhere else in his filmography. 
Grade: B+

16th: I Vitelloni – Federico Fellini (1953)
This is the first Fellini film I’ve watched without a prominent comedic element. Ostensibly, there are the same ingredients here for humor as in any of his other films. In fact, most of Fellini’s other films seem to be dramas or tragedies that take a comedic approach. I Vitelloni is the opposite. The setup is the most frivolous of any of his movies I’ve seen so far (perhaps besides The White Sheik). The film follows a group of five friends, the sons of middle-class parents in a small town, who are reluctant or incapable of giving up their juvenile inclinations for real adulthood. There are the same antics and drunken inclinations as in any other Fellini film, but here it’s portrayed entirely with melancholy. We see the toll these shenanigans take on friends and family members. We see the toll it takes on themselves. As opposed to the drunken stupor, we see the hangover. It makes the film the least enjoyable in the moment, but one that has profound and lasting moments. The best of which is the ending in which one of the boys does leave town while Fellini cuts between the lives of his friends who are staying behind. 
Grade: B

17th: Il Bidone – Federico Fellini (1955)
The first Fellini film to fall a bit flat for me. There’s still plenty to admire. In general, I liked the idea and themes Fellini is trying to capture. It feels like an extension of I Vitelloni or even an anticipation of what a show like The Sopranos would try to do. There are a few amazing sequences. The New Year’s party is thrilling. I also loved the movie theater scene in which Augusto’s daughter watches as he’s arrested. Unfortunately, there are just too many lulls between these moments for the film to really work. Fellini is trying to move back and forth between the highs of these cons and the lows of their aftermath. But because the cons usually target poor peasants, these moments feel like lows too. The film just seems to lack the same spark that makes Fellini’s great films really stand out. 
Grade: C

18th: La Dolce Vita – Federico Fellini (1960)
Remember when I was remarking on how amazing The White Sheik was for its simplicity? It’s amazing to watch Fellini’s transformation as a director by La Dolce Vita. By contrast to his earlier work, this film is extravagant, winding, and incredibly nuanced in structure. The overall story is somewhat simple. We watch Marcello’s descent into “the sweet life” over the course of a week in Rome. But even that is complicated by Fellini’s telling of it. Fellini breaks up the film into grand episodes that are really only linked by Marcello’s presence in them. It’s almost jarring at first as you wait for characters to return to the narrative. Moreover, the film is so broad, it’s hard not to get just lost in these sequences as they’re occurring. How can you do anything but watch during the Baths of Caracalla or Trevi Fountain scenes? There are themes and connections that are readily apparent. I particularly love the scene in which Marcello’s father desperately tries to escape Rome and the lifestyle he so easily fell back into (even if just for a night). But this strikes me as a film that rightfully rewards the effort you put into it.
Grade: B+

21st: Nights of Cabiria – Federico Fellini (1957)
This film couldn’t have come at a better time for me. So far I have really enjoyed all of Fellini’s films. But in the last few I watched, I felt myself missing a certain element. While still ranging from good to excellent, I Vitelloni, Il Bidone, and La Dolce Vita are all much more serious and weightier than Fellini’s first films. There is still fun and incredible spectacle in them, but the general feeling they leave you with is largely melancholic. I realize this is all a strange prelude for Nights of Cabiria, a film that plays out like a Greek tragedy. But with the exception of La Strada (another tragedy) I can’t think of a film that bursts with so much life. For as much as I have been enjoying Fellini, I wonder if I am even more drawn to Masina. Her performance here, like in La Strada, is just incredible. There isn’t a dull moment in the film precisely because she is present for all of them. Honestly, I feel like I would need to watch the film again to really analyze Fellini’s own work in it. 
Grade: A

23rd: The Town – Ben Affleck (2010)
It’s hard for me to really evaluate this film. On one hand, it’s incredibly entertaining. There are three heists in the film that are unbelievably well-done. And each one gets better and better as the movie goes on. The Fenway Park scene is as good as action filmmaking gets. It feels like a Heat homage in the best way possible. Moreover, this movie is over 2 hours long and I would have guessed it was 90 minutes. It flies by. I also think the film and the script do some really smart things on a general / big picture level. The “sunny days” line is pretty on the nose when you first hear it, but I like the way the film ties that phrase into its climax. Same goes for Jon Hamm’s FBI agent repeating the line about Claire needing to lawyer up. On the other hand, there are lines, moments, shots, and plot points that are just needlessly clunky. The movie is working fast to get everything done. And I get that when there are three heists in the film, it’s hard to do a lot of character development. Still, so much of the Ben Affleck – Rebecca Hall relationship, on which the plot hinges, is really heavy-handed. The film gets lucky in that Affleck and Hall have the charisma to pull it off, but it doesn’t make these moments seamless either. The same thing applies to the subplot around Affleck’s character’s mother. It’s forced and obvious. It makes you want to groan when the florist suddenly goes on his evil villain soliloquy about it. Overall, there is more than enough here to make the movie work. I just wonder how much better this film could have been if a few pieces were cleaned up. 
Grade: B

24th: Kicking and Screaming – Noah Baumbach (1995)
This movie was so much funnier than I remembered it being. Perhaps I was a little too close to the subject matter the first time I watched it. To be fair, I think there are many aspects of this film that could rub someone the wrong way. In other words, it doesn’t surprise me that this has mixed reviews. The characters are all truly unlikable. I also think some of Baumbach’s directing feels like a student or first film. For instance, I really struggle with the opening reception scene in which we meet everybody. It’s just flat, especially compared with the rest of the movie. And while I think this is Baumbach’s funniest film, the jokes are fairly inconsistent. Set-ups like the book club or the video store really work. Other jokes, like the repeated “did you beat off today?” feel like placeholders for something better. Overall though, I liked this much more than I remembered. While I wouldn’t even say it’s a great film, it’s the type of movie that I’d really want to make if I were a director. The themes, jokes, and ideas that Baumbach does capture are universal for a certain group of people. It’s also interesting watching this film as a piece of Baumbach’s career. To my knowledge (I haven’t seen Mr. Jealousy), he doesn’t really make another movie like it.
Grade: B+

25th: Memories of Murder – Bong Joon-ho (2003)
Man, what a movie! I don’t even know where to start. One thing that I’ve noticed about Bong Joon-ho’s films is that they’re really idiosyncratic, even when they operate within a genre. That’s a tough thing to do. As in The Host, there are moments, sequences, and decisions in Memories of Murder that are so weird and unexpected. The general portrayal of the detectives, for instance, is pretty striking for a crime film. Not the fact that these characters are bad or dirty – that’s pretty standard – but the level to which they are incompetent really surprises me. Especially considering this is based on true events! The same goes for some of the storylines. I actually can’t believe one of the cops loses his legs to tetanus. It’s so fucking weird. But these types of decisions are refreshing to see in a movie this well-made. Even though this film is horrifying at times, it’s also really fun. When I think of the very best movies in this genre, Silence of the Lambs or Zodiac, that’s what they’re able to do. I really can’t say enough how much I enjoyed this movie. It’s pretty easily my 2nd favorite Bong Joon-ho film. It’s also pretty easily in that pantheon of great crime / serial killer movies. 
Grade: A-

28th: Jules and Jim – François Truffaut (1962)
This is going to be more a collection of my thoughts than a review. I did quite like this movie. It’s endearing, energetic, compelling, and perplexing. But it’s hard for me to know what to really make of it without knowing much about the French New Wave.  To date, the only other films from this movement I’ve seen are Godard’s Breathless and Truffaut’s The 400 Blows. From a story perspective, Jules and Jim is really strange. There’s a first section in which Jules and Jim have an idyllic and inseparable friendship. They add Catherine to the group and both fall in love with her. Jules proposes to Catherine, Jim doesn’t interfere, and they get married. Then there’s a montage of the Great War in which Jules and Jim fight on opposite sides. We then get a final section in which Jules, Jim, and Catherine reunite. This time Jim does intervene. With encouragement from Jules (who fears he’ll lose Catherine altogether otherwise), Jim begins an affair with Catherine. However, this only adds to the confusion of the situation. It finally appears to Jules and Jim, that no man can really satisfy Catherine permanently. Jim returns off and on to his fiancé in Paris (who more or less has Jules’ approach to relationships). The film ends as the three of them reunite and Catherine kills Jim and herself.

One thing I struggle to know is how unlikable these characters are supposed to be? The film seems intentionally designed to provoke audiences by its love triangle. Still, Catherine seems especially unlikable compared with the two male leads. And after all, this film is called Jules and Jim not Jules, Jim, and Catherine. To some extent, the film reminds me of Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises. But I think that novel is even more sympathetic to Brett than this film is to Catherine. It’s something I’d love to read more about, especially since Breathless was also pretty harsh toward its characters. The other main piece I come back to is the war. Is this film supposed to be a commentary or an illumination on it? Truffaut links the war directly to Jules and Catherine’s marriage. In either case, things go south for our characters right at this point. Is Truffaut trying to make a point about what can’t be reclaimed after war, marriage, or both? Again, I suppose I’ll have to do some digging to find out. Oh! One final point. Boy, does this feel like the prototype for every Wes Anderson film.
Grade: A-

30th: 8 1/2 – Federico Fellini (1963)
I liked 8 1/2 the first time I saw it, but I spent most of the film almost trying to figure it out. All I really knew about it was that it’s considered one of the greatest films of all time. Typically, films in that category tend to be really weighty and serious. Especially, if they’re films from 50+ years ago. 8 1/2 is obviously not that. The skeleton key for me to understanding the film the first time was that while there is a story and plot, they’re secondary. The movie doesn’t happen because it’s following these beats. The plot almost occurs because it’s following the events of the movie. What’s more, these events aren’t all happening in “reality.” The film weaves in and out of reality, dreams, and memories. What you ultimately get is a composite of one man’s interior life as he struggles to make a movie (a movie that seems like it will more or less become the very movie we’re watching). Amazing! Watching this film a second time was freeing. I felt like I could sit back and just let it wash over me. I wasn’t working to understand it anymore, I was just enjoying it. And it’s immensely enjoyable. My favorite thing about 8 1/2 is that while it has all the hallmarks of a classic, art-house film (innovation, lasting images, complexity) it’s also terrifically funny. I keep thinking about the scene in which Guido, his wife, and his sister-in-law are out for coffee and his mistress shows up so he hides behind his newspaper. It feels like something from a Charlie Chaplin film or Seinfeld. Re-watching the film, I don’t think 8 1/2 is just the best Fellini film, I think it’s also pretty easily my favorite. 
Grade: A

30th: Some Kind of Heaven – Lance Oppenheim (2020)
Quite the double feature with 8 1/2! In one, you get one man’s fantasy of life. In the other, you get the reality that is the collective fantasy of The Villages, FL. I’m fascinated by Oppenheim’s process making this film. So much of it almost felt too good to be true. There are moments with his characters that feel like they’d have to have been staged. One that comes to mind is as Barbara meets a golf cart salesman and proceeds to go on a date with him. I don’t think a moment like this was artificially created or anything, I just am curious as to how Oppenheim developed or lucked into capturing it. Typically, I like the approach Oppenheim uses here – focusing on characters as opposed to an overarching portrait of this place. I have to say though, I do wish there were 10% more exposition about The Villages. I’d love to know more about the financial aspect behind living in this community, its founding, and any politics that are occurring. Alas, that’s not really the purpose of this film and that’s okay. The moments we get with some of the characters are certainly worth this tradeoff.
Grade: B-

31st: The Little Things – John Lee Hancock (2021)
My first takeaway after seeing The Little Things is that I wish there were more movies like it. Which may be a bit surprising, considering I don’t think the movie is all that great. But the film falls into a genre and type of filmmaking-style that doesn’t seem to really exist anymore. It’s a crime thriller centering on the dynamic performances of “movie stars” (Denzel is obviously a movie star, I’m not sure about Rami Malek or Jared Leto). It’s the formula that worked for Silence of the Lambs or Se7en. Which could be a great thing. This movie is fun and entertaining in a way that few movies are anymore. The major issue, is that this film is nowhere near as good as those other movies. I think there are two main issues that the film can’t overcome. One, the writing is just awful in some places. It’s not even the dialogue or the police lingo either (which you would think would be the hard part) it’s just the actual logic of the script. For instance, Ronda disappears late at night and by the next morning at 8am there are missing posters of her at the diner (in 1990 no less)? Or when Baxter and Deacon aim to investigate Sparma’s apartment they call to arrange a fake meeting with him? Wouldn’t it make more sense for them to do what they do in the next scene – wait for him to leave on his own? Or that there’s no follow-up or concern from the police department that their head investigator is spending all of his time with a disgraced former officer investigating an already cleared suspect? It’s amazing to me that you can get a movie with Denzel freaking Washington that still has holes this big. The second issue is that Rami Malek is miscast. I honestly don’t know if he’s a good actor or not (I tend to like him) but he is not the person for this role. You just never believe that he’s a hot-shot lead investigator (especially next to Denzel). So there it is. While I actually mostly enjoyed the movie, I really can’t help but wish it were better.
Grade: C