Emmy Nominations: The Good, The Bad, and The Snubbed

The Good: 

- While I think 23 nominations is a little excessive, I love The Bear and its entire cast. It feels like it's a little late to be rewarding the second season (especially since it's already won Golden Globes for its second season), it was an amazing season of television. The best surprise, though, is Lionel Boyce getting in! Marcus has been my favorite from the beginning! Do I think it's a comedy? Not really. But it's not the first instance of this, and it won't be the last. There also seems to be a LOT of category fraud this year (...). 

- My second favorite television performance of the year (behind Emma Stone) and I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M SAYING THIS because I've definitely criticized her in the past, but Juno Temple is INCREDIBLE in Fargo. I really, really, really hope she wins it - and I've seen 3 out of the other 4 nominated performances and she blows them away. I also think this season might be my favorite season (it's definitely close between this and the first season). 

- I hate The Morning Show, but Nicole Beharie knocks it out of the part every single time. I love her so much, and she truly was the only part worth watching in that dumbass show. 

- Yay for Slow Horses and Jack Lowden!!! I assume this is for the second season? I didn't love the second season, but I don't think it was as good as the first. Happy for Lowden though - he's a terrific young actor who is largely ignored (because everyone obsesses over the same people - now everyone is on a Glen Powell kick and it's driving me insane). 

- Some great comedies nominated this year (usually my most problematic category) - What We Do in the Shadows, Hacks, Abbott Elementary, Only Murders in the Building. It's so hard to choose, which only means one thing: we win! 

The Bad: 

- I enjoyed Palm Royale just fine, but is it award worthy??? HELL NO. It's entertaining at best. Same for Mr. and Mrs. Smith. And Lessons in Chemistry. I wasn't expecting anything for any of these shows, so it's weird they each received multiple nominations. 

- The Morning Show is genuinely a terrible show - it was okay the first season (and I actually liked a lot about it), but it's practically unwatchable now. And Witherspoon and Aniston are probably the worst parts of the show. 

- The aforementioned category fraud. Sorry, but both Hannah Einbinder and Kali Reis are co-leads in their series but submitted themselves in supporting categories. I understand the thought process of not wanting to compete with their bigger named counterparts (Jean Smart & Jodie Foster, respectively), but it shouldn't be allowed. It really bit Einbinder in the ass though - her supporting category has the legendary Carol Burnett and Meryl Streep (good luck, Hannah!). Plus, is Kaitlin Olsen not a series regular on Hacks? That's weird. She's in multiple episodes in both seasons, and has a whole story arc. Also, so weird that she got ZERO nominations for It's Always Sunny - a show that's been consistently hilarious for 19 years, but received a nomination for this??? Make it make sense. 

- Again, SNL is painfully unfunny. They were largely ignored last year, but came back with a vengeance this year (Bowen Yang??? UGH). 

- All those nominations for Feud: Capote vs The Swans. That show was so fucking boring especially considering the talent. But I feel like they nominated the names and didn't actually watch the show. 

- Once again, the nominations feel very repetitive (a few surprises here and there - like Idris Elba, Reservation Dogs, Matt Barry), but I wish they ventured outside the box a little bit more. 

- I think it's hilarious that Masters of the Air was shut out - and I think it's very deserving of zero nominations. It' was so boring, and some of the acting was questionable. It did *look* very good (the scenes that I was awake for, anyway). 

The Snubbed: 

- The biggest snub I've seen in a long time - Emma Stone in The Curse was on another level. I don't even know what category it should have been in (GG had it under Drama - but that's weird), but she should have absolutely been nominated (and probably should have won). 

- Another big snub for me, but a more expected one - The Changeling. I thought it was incredible. And some of those performances have stayed with me. Clark Backo and LaKeith Stanfield were robbed by critics that were too intimidated by a show they didn't completely understand. 

- It's weird to me that something like Mr. and Mrs. Smith is nominated and then another silly pure entertainment type series like The Gentlemen is almost completely ignored (Guy Ritchie did squeeze out a director nod). They are completely different, but The Gentlemen had style, it was written really well, interesting & layered characters, etc., and I think it spoke to a wider audience. I think submitting it to the comedy category was its mistake (it's on the fence, but it should have been in the same category as Mr. and Mrs. Smith - and they went Drama. Once again, I argue that they should get rid of gendered categories and instead add different genre categories - sci fi, action, dramedy, etc). 

- I'm actually surprised at the Expats snub. I didn't love it, but it seems like a show that the Emmys would nominate. I do think that Sarayu Blue definitely gave an award worthy performance (better than all 7 in that category - even though I love Aja Naomi King and both performances from Baby Reindeer). 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Monkey Man - I think I read a little too many positive things about this movie, so ultimately I have to admit that I'm extremely disappointed with it. It's a 3 star movie (and I think I'm being generous), but there's nothing memorable or noteworthy at all about it. I do love Dev Patel, and it's super cool that he directed this. It also has a great soundtrack. But, it's very boring. Not much happens for a FULL 40 minutes other than some oddly placed flashbacks, and then there is this epic fight scene that is really strong - bloody, gritty, great camera-work, very stylish, but I just don't feel like the film earned it. I did laugh when he goes to crash through the window to escape but hits the glass so hard he bounces back instead of it breaking. I mean, I laugh-laughed. For like 20 minutes, so I don't really know what happens for a while. It's just such a classic revenge tale, very plain & simple. And Sharlto Copley does this movie NO favors (he reminds me of how Rami Malek was SO GOOD in Mr. Robot, that I automatically thought he was a genius actor, but he's been absolutely horrendous in everything else. It's like how Copley was SO GOOD in District 9, but I cringe when I see him now. He's such a bad actor. It's embarrassing.). I don't really have much else to say about this, which is part of my problem with it.  

2. Under Paris - This is a great watch. It's far better than I was expecting and currently my favorite movie of the year so far (to be fair, I haven't seen Civil War, Love Lies Bleeding, Challengers, and so many more!). First of all, it has a really solid actress in the main role - which I think is kind of rare for these b-rate shark movies. I don't think I've seen Berenice Bejo since The Past, but she's, like, an award-caliber actress. I was a little nervous that this meant the film was going to take itself too seriously, but her performance is definitely what sells the whole damn thing. Second, I love that it uses the ridiculous aspects of past movies like Jaws and Piranha as clear inspirations. The plot is that a mutated giant shark has made its way into the Seine, OF COURSE the same time that a triathlon is scheduled. The mayor doesn't listen to the warnings because it would ruin the optics for the upcoming Olympic games (scheduled for Paris this summer in real life). But it also takes the ridiculous plot and gives it some relevancy, not only about the Olympic games (which have been criticized by the people of Paris because the city is not ready for it and is ignoring the problems with unhoused people etc.,), but also with climate change, as this young group of activists think they can save the shark. There's a lot of shots of the ocean covered in plastic, the Seine covered in muck and trash, and appearing a yellowish-green color, etc., instead of the more "blue water" shots that typically fill the screen. The message gets a little lost once the carnage starts, but I appreciate the attempt at something deeper in a movie like this. And speaking of, third, the carnage is spectacular. Some wonky CGI, sure, but overall I was really impressed. There's also a very "take no prisoners" vibe with a majority of the cast getting ripped apart by sharks. I just had so much fun with it - far better than recent shark movies like The Meg. Oh, and the main guy is super hot, which always helps. 

3. I.S.S. - This isn't necessarily a bad movie, just very average. It has a great premise, but they just don't fully follow through with it. I'm not the biggest fan of Ariana DeBose (as an actress. She's got a great voice, and I'm sure she's great as a stage performer, but she's not a strong film actress. But she has an Oscar, so what do I know? It's crazy to me, though, that this is her next big role after WINNING AN OSCAR). But, I love Chris Messina, John Gallagher Jr., and Costa Ronin (Oleg from The Americans, in another Russian villain role - he will never overcome the stereotype). DeBose is definitely the weak link, which is a problem considering that she is the star of the movie. I think it's funny that all of the promos and posters used this image of her with her helmet on being blasted into space and that's literally the first minute of the movie. The other problem is that everything feels very Obvious (with a capital O), like Gallagher Jr.'s true nature is very clear from minute one. And the foreshadowing is insane ("when you don't hear that hum, that's when you can start to panic" - ummmm do you think the humming noise is going to disappear at some point??? Maybe?? It's just so dumb). The surveillance shots are really unnecessary too? I don't get it. I feel like those shots indicate that they are being watched, but by who? It just adds more time to a movie that already feels bloated. It's only 95 minutes long but it feels like a full 2 hours. They do a good job with building the tension, and like I said, the plot is good. It's just executed poorly. However, there is a TERRIFIC ending. 

4. The American Society of Magical Negroes - When I saw the trailer for this, I honestly thought it was an SNL sketch or something. The concept of this film is clearly problematic. I think it's weird that it was ever made - I feel like if executives polled a room full of black people, like "hey what do you think of this concept", a majority would have been like "please don't make that". It seems so obvious, and yet, this was greenlit, and also heavily marketed! The bigger problem, though, is that it never reaches anything offensive because overall it's pretty tame and uninteresting. It becomes more about this love triangle, which is unnecessary. The concept, of "magical negroes", is just stupid and places the blame on black people (and other POC) instead of higher institutions (i.e government, education, etc.) - as if racism would be solved if black people made white people feel "deep social ease". I get that they are trying to make a satire about the cliched black characters that are featured in predominately white films, but I don't think most will make that connection. And you know what, there is a lot of dialogue about black men "scaring" white women, but they fail to ignore the fact that women are just scared of men. Period. If I'm walking alone at night (which I often do because I work late hours and my work does not have parking - it's street parking and the free street parking is about 5 blocks away), and a man is walking towards me, I definitely get nervous. And usually, if it's dark, I can't tell his race. But if I cross the street or pick up the pace in my steps, do you know what happens when it happens to be a black man walking by? They get offended, and about 50% of the time will make a comment about me being racist ("little white girl scared of the big black man" or something to that effect). It always makes me feel like shit, and sometimes I want to engage to explain myself, but I just keep walking. Like, I'm 5ft tall. 95lbs. Walking by myself is dangerous! Just like it's dangerous for a black man to walk in a white neighborhood! I feel like black men should be more empathetic to that situation. It's a different danger, but still a danger. Annnyyyywaaayyy. There's a whole Barbie type speech about racism and it's just as eye-rolling as the Barbie one (not because of the actual words but because of how it's supposed to be perceived as groundbreaking dialogue). I also just don't like Justice Smith - his voice is so low it almost seems fake and he shows zero emotion on his face. 

5. Perfect Days - What a gorgeous film! I absolutely adored every second of it, and I appreciate the story it tells so much. I wish everyone could watch this and make some serious life changes, because I think the world would be a much happier place. It's so simple, but very effective. I don't know much about Wim Wenders (I've only seen Wings of Desire a long time ago), but I like this "slice of life" storytelling style so I might look into his filmography more. This story follows a janitor's daily life, a job that is often shown and perceived as unrewarding, but this is shown in such a different life. This man is fulfilled - he has several hobbies (reading, collecting physical media, photography), he cares about his work which gives him a feeling of being proud and productive, he finds responsibility in taking care of plants and watching them grow, he connects and interacts with strangers, etc., and all of these things give him a purpose. This is the human experience - if you nurture and protect these things, you will indeed find happiness and live a fulfilling life. It's so simple and yet so many people struggle to grasp the concept. I'm not saying that it's always easy - and I think this is shown in the film with some of his interactions - how his co-worker steals from him and takes advantage of him, how the woman that lost her child looks at him accusingly instead of with gratitude. But the important thing is that he doesn't let these exchanges change who he is or question the choices that he's made. There's a key scene with his sister that shows some insight into his past - that he is estranged from his family for a reason that isn't disclosed, and it's also implied that he might be financially better off if he wasn't cut off from his family. I know so many people who surround themselves with toxic people because of financial reasons and I'll never understand it. It's just not worth it. Anyway, I can also see why film nerds really connected to this with the focus on physical media being such a hot button topic - he collects books, cassettes, vhs tapes, and still gets pictures developed (I do too! I still have photo albums and after every vacation I print all my pictures and write down what everything was - I have a terrible memory so this helps me). The soundtrack and needle drops are a little too on the nose, but it's also perfect so I can't complain (ending with Nina Simone's "Feelin' Good" - just perfect). I think the only thing I took issue with is the American woman (I'm assuming she was an American tourist, but she only spoke briefly so I'm not 100% sure) was confused by the clear bathroom doors, but we definitely have those all over the states (and for a while now! I remember those being a big new thing when I was in college - so like 20 years now). It's a dumb little thing, but it bothers me nonetheless! 

Best Films of 2023 ***Updated***

It's July!! Here's my annual *updated* Best of list: 

1. Perfect Days 

2. May December 

3. Oppenheimer

4. The Zone of Interest

5. All of Us Strangers

6. Infinity Pool

7. Anatomy of a Fall 

8. Beau is Afraid

9. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

10. Society of the Snow

10.5. Past Lives 

A little different from the list I posted in January - 4 films added (one of those taking the top spot). Overall, 2023 was a GREAT year for movies, and I think a lot of my favorites aligned with other critics and film enthusiasts, which is sometimes rare for me. It's also great to see more and more foreign language films getting bigger releases (5 of my faves are not in English! That might be a record for me). 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. The Book of Clarence - While I liked this, for the most part, it's definitely disappointing. I was expecting it to be my favorite movie of the year (which I just realized it's not even considered a 2024 release anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter), but it's mostly mediocre. Jeymes Samuel's The Harder They Fall was my favorite film of 2021 for several reasons, but the main reason is because it felt bold and fresh, and had style. I also think it's important to tell historical black stories from non-white perspectives, in spaces other than slavery and prisons. I knew that the whole religious aspect of this was not going to be my favorite (I'm not religious, nor do I like watching religious stories, for the most part), but I was so down for this cast - LaKeith, RJ Cyler (I don't understand how RJ and Kelvin Harrison Jr. aren't at the top of everyone's list for next generation talent), plus OMAR SY, and the love of my life - James McAvoy. I mean, I would watch the four of them recite the bible, to be honest. I think my disappointment lies in the fact that it's a little slow-moving, and becomes a little repetitive so I found myself bored for a lot of it. And McAvoy doesn't show up for quite a while, so I was automatically annoyed. I almost feel like they shouldn't have advertised his role at all - a 'la Benedict Cumberbatch - I didn't even know it was him in that role until towards the end. But there are some great moments & scenes that really standout and have me convinced that Samuel is a director to watch, for sure. The dance interlude is probably my favorite scene - super cool, unexpected, and fun. There's some really funny dialogue if you pay attention - it's extremely well-written, filled with a lot of sarcasm and wit. McAvoy's dry delivery of "once you die from drowning, you'll be free to go. Proceed." had me dying. And I like the way that Samuel uses music - some of it is super obvious ("I Believe in Miracles", etc.), but it works for me in this context (he has a background in music - under the pseudonym The Bullitts, more well-known in the UK than here, I think). Some parts of the movie did irk me though - like the way LaKeith's eyeliner changes from scene to scene (where was the Script Supervisor???) and his hair and beard look so fake when he plays the twin - it's almost comical. Perhaps it's done on purpose, but it felt like high school drama club hair & makeup. 

2. The First Omen - Okay, I read a lot of good things about this, but I hardly believed the praise. However, it's very good. And SHOCKINGLY, it is currently one of my favorite films of the year! Isn't that crazy?! I have not seen many good films this year though (still hopeful that Love Lies Bleeding, The Fall Guy, and Civil War are all great!). I just recently rewatched the original The Omen, and I enjoyed it, but I think I liked this one just as much, which is pretty rare. Some of the shots are GORGEOUS - it completely pulls me in with the scene at the club and then she wakes up with her hair all spidered out on her pillow. I literally was like "oh okay, you have my attention" and I sat up straight and glued my eyes to that television. And it just continued to impress. As I said above, I couldn't care less about the religious part of the film, so stories like these are never going to connect with me, but a well-made movie like this will always capture me. Nell Tiger Free gives a terrific performance - never too showy, but still dramatic. She kind of reminds me of Alexandria Daddario (which is a very good thing for me). There's some very traumatic birthing scenes that will stay with me for a while. And there is a really strong lead-up to the end that is kind of surprising, but also I kind of figured (always assume they will set these types of movies up for sequels - obvi we already have the sequel to this, but her story would be a spin-off of that and I would very much look forward to seeing more). This is also a very nice reminder that some prequels, reboots, etc., can be very successful and even enrichen the original material if done well and with care. 

3. Godzilla Minus One - *spoilers ahead* This is also as good as everyone says. Actually, maybe that's not true - I saw a ton of 5 star reviews, and I definitely wouldn't go that far. But it's certainly a 4 star film and it's just shy of making my Top 10 of 2023. I think it's success is largely the human story of a kamikaze pilot returning to his life after the war - the treatment of him as a failure and as a symbol of Japan's failure is certainly fascinating. I could have watched that story without a monster attacking the city and still would have probably loved it. I also think that the design of Godzilla is incredible and a genuinely terrifying monster compared to previous designs. BUT, I do think it's weird that people consistently used this movie to cite how it's possible to make a low budget action movie look this good completely ignoring the fact that it's made in Japan - where this movie is considered to be an extremely high budget film and also they don't pay people as well. It's just not a realistic comparison to a typical Hollywood blockbuster. I also think it's INSANE that people cried at this ending??? Did you not expect it? It's quite clear that he's going to survive when the other guy reminds him to "remember this right before" and points to a lever in the aircraft. It's also not exactly an original idea (it's quite literally the same solution as Independence Day and I'm sure many others that I can't think of right now). AND it's also obvious that the woman isn't dead either because WE DON'T SEE HER DIE. I feel like some people have never watched a movie before. There are very clear plot devices that this movie follows to pull at your heartstrings - and films that are so obvious about it just don't pull at my emotions enough to make me cry (unless it's like a dog dying or something - I will always cry at that no matter the setup). But, it's extremely well made and has a great human drama behind it. It definitely feels more "real" too compared to the more recent Hollywood versions of Godzilla. I do like the apple+ series though, because, again, they give us humans to care about. 

4. Hit Man - UMMMMM what the fuck - this movie fucking sucks. I felt like I was being punk'd while watching it. Like, this can't actually be the movie that critics have been talking about for the last 9 months - raving about, listing it in Oscar snubs, demanding a theater release, etc.???? It's so fucking boring that I actually had to turn it off an hour in because I couldn't bear it anymore (not even because I was tired - I was wide awake! But this was putting me to sleep!). I watched the rest, begrudgingly, a few days later. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, because you know what I also hated?? Boyhood. That's right. Fucking awful. There's a giant rant about why I hated it so much somewhere on this blog, but I also thought it was fucking boring. I do like Richard Linklater, though, and he's made some of my favorite movies (the Before trilogy, A Scanner Darkly), but there are some seriously questionable films in his filmography that make me scratch my head as to why people rave about them. I think the biggest issue I have with this is that it's listed as a "comedy" and it's not funny. Like, not even in a "dark comedy" kind of way. I like Glen Powell a lot - and I've been singing his praises since Scream Queens, but now he's become a bit overpraised. He's charming and has screen presence, but he's not the talent that some are claiming. And this is definitely proof. Those different personas he does while pretending to be a hit man are...rough. It's not realistic in any way - there is just no way that someone wouldn't clearly see that this man is pretending to be these weird characters; they would instantly know it's a setup. It's so dumb and, quite simply, bad acting. But I think people get swept up in the "charming" aspect and confuse that with "good acting" (they do the same with Tom Cruise. That man has ONE good acting performance on his resume. But he's charming, so he must be a good actor. He's also a sociopath cultist, but, again, he's charming, so all is forgiven). I think Powell is set to have a great career, and I'm not mad at it, but I hope he realizes his strengths (rom-coms, silly coming of age stories, etc), and sticks to those. The highlight of the movie is Adria Arjona - I hope the hype for this movie launches her into superstardom. She's insanely hot, and this movie takes full advantage of that. And I do see a bit of natural chemistry between them (waaay more than he had with the more hyped Sydney Sweeney), but I also don't root for this relationship at all right from the beginning. She's an abuse victim suffering from PTSD and other emotional issues - clearly at the tipping point of being a straight up psychopath, and he's fully aware of this and decides to date her anyway disguised as someone else. It's not romantic or sweet or whatever, it's taking advantage of someone at their lowest moment. I just fully hated the whole thing. There is ONE good scene (you'll know it exactly when you see it), but that doesn't make a good movie, guys. 

5. Origin - This could have been a documentary *said in the same frustrating tone as "this could have been an email"*! I like what DuVernay is trying to do, and I always appreciate art being used to initiate difficult conversations, but there a few big reasons why this is a big miss for me. First of all, this whole concept being "taught to the audience" in 2023 is WILD. I felt like the film has this very condescending tone that's teaching us something we don't know. But....but....we learn about caste in 8th grade in America. She literally says something like "I bet you guys don't know about the Dalits" (the "untouchables") in India and everyone in the movie (actual adults) are, like, SHOCKED. The movie clearly serves as advertisement for this book ("Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents" by Isabel Wilkerson), but it fails to convince me that I'll learn something. It's basically telling me that if we all just paid attention in middle school then maybe racism wouldn't exist? And I just don't believe that. We already know why racism exists. Second, the "past" scenes feel very History Channel reenactments and disrupt the flow of the movie. And third, watching someone do research is not very interesting. I get the idea is more about this woman trying to overcome her personal tragedies to work through her theories and write this book, that is about a very difficult subject, but it's just not enough to watch for over 2 hours. It's extremely boring. There are some things that I do like about it - showing her relationship with her husband (who is white) is an important aspect to her life (although the scene when they meet is so cringe - it's a "white savior" moment that made my eyes roll so hard into the back of my head). The beginning scene that portrays Trayvon Martin's death is very strong, and the ending scene with the black boy in the pool is incredibly powerful. I thing telling this boy's story from a white perspective is also interesting because it's important to keep white people in the conversation of racism - people are not born racist it is taught to us and watching these moments as children effects everyone. I think a lot of white people can point out a specific moment in their childhood when they witnessed racism, and they had to choose, in that moment, whether what they were witnessing was right or wrong (and we are also taught that adults are "right", so I don't blame children who grow up racist, but I do blame adults who don't challenge their own ideas and aim to be better). I'm kind of on a tangent, which I do think is a good thing - this movie definitely got me thinking, but it just didn't tell me anything new. I feel like maybe we need to stop focusing on the "why" and "how" and start focusing on "what's next". History is obviously important, and there has been a very apparent attempt at erasing a lot of this history, but I just wish the film felt more challenging instead of like an 8th grade History lesson. 

Movie Marathon: Batman*

1. Batman (1989) - First of all, why did I think Michael Keaton was in 3 Batman movies??? I think my brain erased the Val Kilmer phase and I just thought Keaton had 3, Clooney had 1, and then Bale had 3. Anyway...I loved the Keaton phase as a kid, but I haven't watched them in DECADES (yes, I'm that old). I'm genuinely surprised at how well made this movie is - the shadowy noir vibe is on point, and it's a solid thriller! I just had so much fun with this rewatch - the practical effects, the cast (Kim Basinger, Jack Nicholson - they just revel in these roles), the color schemes (especially Joker - it's vibrant, but still feels serious and dangerous). It's an excellent rewatch - even better than I was expecting. 

2. Batman Returns - I think this is my second favorite Batman movie out of all of them (Batman Begins is my fave). I LOVED this as a kid, and I'm happy to say that it's still incredible. Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman is one of my favorite castings of all-time. It's weird that we criticize good actors for joining comic book movies, but this has been happening for YEARS and it used to be a good thing. I mean, I think Catwoman, in general is going to sway me to love this movie more because I'm a self-identified "cat lady". But, I do think Pfeiffer is genuinely good in this, and definitely steals the whole damn movie. I love her little sashay, then "meow", and then a building explodes. It's just so iconic. And she has the best dialogue ("life's a bitch, now so am I"). AND she even has the best costume because it actually looks handmade - like she, herself, stitched some latex together (and it's so sexy, obvi). As for the Batman part, it all feels a little inconsequential compared to the Catwoman stuff, but I do love when Batman uses his Batwings - even more so than the Batmobile (it seems so much more convenient too!). 

3. Batman Forever - Yeah, my brain is definitely playing tricks on me, because I also don't remember Chris O'Donnell being in multiple Batman movies either (I only remember him in the Clooney one). But O'Donnell, as Robin, was very personal to me as a teen because I LOVED him. He had such a good run of films in the 90s (Scent of a Woman, Mad Love, Circle of Friends, Fried Green Tomatoes, and, the one I re-watched the most, In Love and War - I was also a Sandy B super-fan). I still love him but, unfortunately, I don't watch those CBS shows that he's done for the last 15 years (I also feel like it's relevant to point out that he's been married to the same woman since 1997, which is super-duper rare for celebrities. He's a good egg). I think the biggest issue with this one is that there are too many characters - it doesn't feel balanced and loses focus. I also just don't think Val Kilmer was a strong Batman, and definitely a bit of a letdown from Keaton's performance. Tommy Lee Jones is trying to have fun with this, but it also just doesn't work for me. He's so naturally stoic and dry, so his over-animated Two-Face feels out of place for him. BUT, Jim Carrey as The Riddler is also an iconic casting moment. I would have LOVED a Batman movie with Keaton, O'Donnell, Carrey, Pfeiffer, and Nicholson. Also, I can NOT get over the drawn on eyebrows on Drew Barrymore's face (almost as bad as Rachel Weisz's eyebrows in The Mummy!). 

4. Batman & Robin - I fully admit that this is, by far, the worst of the Batman movies. And YET, it's the one I've seen the most. I was 16 when it was released, loving Chris O'Donnell, and my BFF at the time was obsessed with George Clooney, so we literally would watch this movie at least once a week. I probably could have recited the whole thing back then. It was far more common back then to rewatch things over and over again because we didn't have the access to array of entertainment that we have now. We would record a movie off the television premier and then watch that one movie on repeat for days on end. I definitely had the most fun with this Batman entry, but objectively, it is terrible. Clooney is so stiff and emotionless, it's almost jarring. And Alicia Silverstone??? Wow. What a miscast. I think the highlight is Uma Thurman (and her space buns! It begs the question - who did it first: Thurman as Poison Ivy or Scary Spice?? I totally used to do the space buns, too. Even did mini ones for my prom in 1999). But you know what's weird? As many times as I've seen this, I didn't connect that one of the villains is Bane - the same Bane that Hardy does, but is entirely different!! It's actually weird to see Hardy's version so close after watching this one. I don't have much to say about this one - it's feels too glossy, less gritty than its predecessors. And it's no longer fun. 

5. Batman Begins - I know most cite The Dark Knight as the best of the Nolan trilogy, but I've always been team Batman Begins. TDK is great, but it's also very bloated. While I think Begins is just a stronger story that is told in a more concise way. It's also the introduction of Christian Bale as Batman, and he knocks it out of the park. It's obviously a more serious, darker tone, but I think Bale does an incredible job at still keeping the comic book feel of the character. It dives deep into the psychology of Batman, which becomes a major theme of the rest of the trilogy. Also, I think this set the path for Nolan as a big blockbuster filmmaker. I remember watching this in a theater, and thinking it was just brilliant. It felt cinematic, bold, with a fully-realized universe that revitalized this franchise. There are very few movies that I can specifically recall watching in a theater, but I remember being stunned by this. Plus Cillian Murphy is EXCELLENT in this, and often a forgotten villain especially over all the actors who play Joker. But, I found his Scarecrow to be genuinely terrifying. And he terrified me even more that year with Red Eye that same year! I'm glad that Nolan kept casting him in future projects - he deserved that Oscar for Oppenheimer, but he also deserved the recognition for a lot of things he's been ignored for instead. The movie has very few flaws, but casting Katie Holmes is probably the most egregious one (and fixed in future films). I was a huge Dawson's Creek fan, but Holmes has never been a great actress (I still love her though!). Also, I never noticed that the worst character of all-time, Joffrey from Game of Thrones, is in this for a quick second (that kid will always be Joffrey. And I will always hate him). 

6. The Dark Knight - As I said, this film just feels so bloated. It all goes downhill once Two-Face appears. I like Aaron Eckhart and I think he does a good job with the role (and the makeup is excellent!), but the movie just starts to drag by that point. But, Heath Ledger gives a performance of a lifetime, there's no denying that. It's still so sad that this really launched his career into superstardom (he was obviously very famous - with Brokeback and 10 Things I Hate About You, plus my husband just recently informed me that A Knight's Tale is in his top 10 favorite movies of all time. WHAT? A Knight's Tale??? I'm baffled.). But this was a huge milestone. He devours this role - in his mannerisms, voice, body language, plus he is one of the few actors who was able to utilize the makeup on his face to his advantage instead of letting it detract from the performance. It somehow feels chaotic and messy, while also feeling perfectly detailed. But the rest of the film is just messy. Some scenes feel like they were chopped too short, and the placement of scenes do not flow together, while other scenes drag on forever. The flow just doesn't work. And there are some very famous scenes that are laugh-out-loud funny that I don't think were originally supposed to be funny (like how Two-Face doesn't instantly recognize Joker when he's dressed as a nurse). I thought with this rewatch, I might feel differently, but I still think I'm right. 

7. The Dark Knight Rises - I think it's weird how hard people/critics were on this entry into the trilogy when it's pretty much equal in quality to TDK and has a lot of the same issues (bloated storyline & pacing issues). Tom Hardy, as Bane, gives an equally terrifying performance as Ledger did (although I think Joker is just a showier role). And the rest of the cast is incredible (better than the first two!) - Anne Hathaway is a great Catwoman (would have loved a spin-off), and I REALLY, REALLY wish they continued JGL's role as Robin (or Nightwing or whatever he was supposed to be). And I think this is when everyone fell in love with Marion Cotillard - although I think it takes waaaay too long to get to the twist of her character. I like that this feels like a true trilogy, too. It connects itself to the first one, continues the story, but gives it a satisfying end, too. Honestly, I probably enjoyed watching this more than TDK, and I think if it weren't for Ledger's performance others would agree with me! Ledger's performance does give TDK the edge though. 

My Ranking (yes, I decided I'll start ranking my marathon posts): 

Batman Begins

Batman Returns

Batman ('89)

The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight Rises

Batman Forever

Batman & Robin

*Obviously there are a lot more Batman movies out there, but I limited this to start at Keaton's Batman and end at Nolan's trilogy. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Migration - This is a very forgettable animated movie, but it's also kind of cute. Fairly harmless entertainment that I think small kids will enjoy. But, also, if I watched this as a kid, I would never eat poultry again. It was pretty hard getting me to eat any meat as a kid anyway, but chicken was always a "maybe" if I was in the mood for it. But there's a whole subplot about a chef who is trying to kill them and COOK them, and I would have been horrified. I'm also still baffled at the casting of Awkwafina for VOICE ROLES?? What the fuck? WHY? She has the worst voice in the world - it's like nails on a chalkboard. Like, just because she has a distinct voice, doesn't mean she has a good voice. I seriously just don't understand the thought process. The animation is good (Illumination animation doesn't bother me as much as Pixar, for the most part), and the rest of the voice cast do a great job (Kumail Nanjiani, Elizabeth Banks, Danny DeVito, etc.). I laughed in a few spots, too - like when the child duck is too shy to poop while in the sky. I like that the story is a family adventure, too, which is sort of rare for animated movies - I feel like too often, the kids have overbearing parents, so they go out on their own adventure and get into trouble, but this is a cute story about family bonding and experiencing the world together. I would love to see that become a trend for kids movies. 

2. Ferrari - *spoilers if you don't already know the true story* I mean, I can't even begin to talk about this movie without bringing up THE scene first. THE SCENE. One of the most harrowing, gruesome scenes I've ever seen on film, and I was not expecting it. I'm completely unfamiliar with the story, so I went into this fairly blind. I do remember the viral q&a that circulated in which an interviewer/audience member told Adam Driver that he thought the crash scenes were "cheesy" (and Driver responded "fuck you, I don't know" LOL. ICONIC). The story definitely eludes to tragedy - and it's quite obvious that things weren't going to work out for the one driver that they focused on the most. I assumed that he crashed. And maybe died. BUT, his tire blowing out and then the car driving through a crowd filled with small children was horrifying. They literally show body parts being thrown in the air and decapitated bodies. I gasped and my hand instinctually covered my mouth in shock. And I sat like that, with my hand over my mouth, in shock, for like 5 minutes before I started manically googling everything about the actual crash - and to my utter devastation, it's all true. Nine people were killed, five of which were children. And I have no idea how someone can describe that scene as "cheesy" - it's not cheesy at all. It felt very realistic and jarring. As for the rest of the film, it's...okay. There's a lot of things that were criticized that I actually don't agree with - like Driver's performance/accent. It's definitely weird that Driver is in another famous Italian role right after the Gucci movie (is he even a little bit Italian? I know he's American, but does he have Italian lineage? I would guess English/Scottish/Nordic, but he doesn't seem Italian at all), but I don't think the accent is as bad as I had read. I've definitely heard worse. He sort of does this mumbly, gravely Italian accent and it works with the character, I think. I'm not even an Adam Driver fan, but I think this is one of his better performances. I'm not really a Michael Mann fan either, but he certainly has a few bangers (although nothing since Heat), and I appreciate that he has a certain film aesthetic that is very distinguished. Penelope Cruz is definitely the highlight - as many critics have pointed out. If this were a stronger film, she surely would have had more awards attention (and she is very believable as this fiery Italian woman). I think the problem is that it's not really about anything. The film starts in what feels like the middle of the story, and the audience is expected to just *know* who all of these people are and their relationship to each other. And then it doesn't really go anywhere. We learn that Ferrari's son died, we learn that he's having an affair that produced another son, and we learn that he's a very competitive man. But it's all sort of background noise without any real point. I also can't really tell where the film stands on Ferrari's responsibility for the crash? He was cleared of manslaughter charges, and the film clearly shows the tire blowing out as if it hits something (as opposed to a faulty tire), but they also show Ferrari pushing his team to be the best. He must feel guilt? Or anger? Or...something? It's just odd to show all this tragedy, but not how it effected him at all. Shailene Woodley is horribly miscast and Jack O'Connell is in WAY too small of a role for this point in his career. And Patrick Dempsey with that hair?? How can I take that seriously? But the scenes between Driver and Cruz are electric, and the scene when his mom tells her "he's entitled to an heir" is heartbreaking - what a horrible thing to say to a grieving mother. 

3. Madame Web - I would love to tell you all that reviews were too harsh, and that this has some redeeming qualities, but unfortunately I can't. And yet it's not the worst movie I've seen this year (I don't know what that says about me, though! Haha!). I do think that Dakota Johnson is INNOCENT. This is not her fault at all. I think she put her trust into the filmmakers and assumed they knew what they were doing. I hated her in the 50 Shades movies, but I have found her really adorable and charming in every other project. And, surprisingly, I really like her in this role - her line delivery is so fucking funny in some parts and I think audiences were too focused on the awfulness surrounding her to get what she was trying to do. So I guess that is one redeeming quality. But the rest of it is all bad. As much as I like Sydney Sweeney, I think this is a big miscast. She's done too many adult roles now to pass as a teenager (and I think this is one of the reasons that Euphoria has been put on hold - they have to fast-forward the timeline. Those kids are all old now!). Plus, the wig is SO BAD, it was hard to look at her. And to my (and I'm sure everyone's) disappointment, they only put her in the Spider-Woman costume (is that who she's supposed to become? Sorry, I don't know the history or future of these characters) for like .5 seconds and it's shown in the trailer. The dialogue is definitely the worst part of the film - as mercilessly made fun of from the trailer. There's this banter between the three young girls that is really painful - it has no energy, rhythm, or authenticity, they literally just spew lines at each other. The famous "he was in the Amazon with my mom when she was researching spiders just before she died" isn't even in the movie, which somehow makes it even funnier. But it's also funny that her mom who was researching spiders in the Amazon has the last name WEBB??? There's also the line "when you take on great power, responsibility will come" LOL (is he Yoda??). The timeline is also completely fucked. I know that it was reported on that they were trying to connect it to Hollands Spider-Man, but they messed up while filming it and couldn't change it, but does it even make sense that Adam Scott is the Uncle Ben??? Like, how on Earth did they think they were going to be able to make that work? I didn't even realize the timeline until they had "Toxic" come on the radio as a newly released song. That places it at 20 years ago - for some reason? Which means her mom was researching spiders in the early 70s? I would have never guessed that. And the villain is stupid - he's trying to kill 3 teenage girls because they might kill him years later? That's the whole premise of the movie? FOR REAL??? 

4. Eileen - This is a rough one to get through. I didn't see many people talk about it so I didn't expect it to be great or anything, but I certainly didn't expect it to be this bad. Everyone is miscast (Shea Whigham excluded because he's good in everything. And *fun fact* he went to my college!). I'm already in the minority in not liking Thomasin McKenzie as an actress. But the thing is, she's young and has a lot of potential, so I'm not completely biased against her - but I do think that she's absolutely miscast here and most things she's been in have been beyond her capabilities. Apparently she watched a whole lot of Marky Mark movies to get into this character and Boston accent. I'm not actually joking, she freely admits that she did this for the role. It is beyond a bad Boston accent, it's practically unwatchable. Then Anne Hathaway comes strolling in with a "mixed" accent - I get the intent because this woman is all show and very performative, so a "fake" accent goes with the character, but it almost sounds like she's not even American. Like, everyone in the movie should be questioning why she's walking around with a fake accent. Every once in a while, at my work, I run into these really rich bored white women who decide they want to do an accent for the day, and I honestly find it to be SO FUCKING WEIRD. I'll start helping them and hear them try an Irish accent or something and I have to walk away and have someone else help them. Anyway, Anne just overdoes everything so having her as this woman who also overdoes everything just feels so inauthentic - it's like cartoonish. And speaking of overdoing things - this fucking actor keeps showing up in everything I watch and I HATE HIM. I finally looked up his name and it's Owen Teague. He's awful in everything I've seen him in and he over-acts. Apparently, he's also in the new Planet of the Apes movie (I only know this because of that viral interview that went around with the dumb tiktok person, and film journalists complaining about them being invited for red carpet interviews). I really need him to go away, though. He's not really in this enough to have any effect on the actual movie, but I was annoyed by the sight of him. The other problem with this movie is that it is boring as fuck! It's described as a "thriller", but not one thrilling thing happens for the entire runtime. I thought it was going to have like a Persona or Single White Female sort of vibe, but it just goes NOWHERE. 

5. Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre - I've been really struggling with Guy Ritchie lately (except for The Gentleman tv series! I absolutely loved it! I can't wait for more. And there BETTER be more!). This isn't terrible, but it should have been a lot better. I think it feels more like a parody of a Guy Ritchie movie than an actual Guy Ritchie movie, though. There are some really weird, unnecessary shots that hurt my brain. The plot is a little over-cooked. Most of the dialogue falls flat. Plus, I watched this a little over 2 weeks ago and I'm struggling to remember what the actual ending was. I do think that Aubrey Plaza was a big part of the problem - aside from the lacking chemistry with the others, her line delivery is so weird that it's kind of funny, but I don't think it's supposed to be intentionally funny? And the parts that are supposed to be funny fall flat because she's just so awkward. I've never really liked her in any project outside of Parks & Rec, even though I love her. It's just hard to tell what is bad acting and what is intentional dry humor. And it doesn't work here at all. Even though I appreciate that Ritchie is trying to relaunch Josh Hartnett's career (he was also in Wrath of Man), he's bad here (also, another *fun fact* he also went to my college). The saving grace is Jason Statham, as per. He just does these roles so well, and I think he's able to work around the bad acting surrounding him by just being his awesome self. I also love Hugh Grant's shift to these super eccentric roles - he's become more of a character actor in his later career and I am HERE FOR IT. I also really like the other guy in the group - he plays of off The Stath very well, so I just looked up his name and it's....wait for it....BUGZY MALONE. What a fucking stage name LOL. I can't. He's a musician/actor from the UK, but I'm telling you right now, he will not be taken seriously in American with that name (I'm joking obvi, we have famous people named Ice Spice and Doja Cat). There are a few scenes that they do really well together, and I would definitely watch a spin-off of them or a sequel with them, but only them. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Anyone But You -  I'm not the biggest fan of rom-coms, but I'll always give them a chance, and hope for the best because sometimes they are genuinely good. Especially rom-coms that are based on Shakespeare plays - 10 Things I Hate About You is a perfect example!! So, this is a modern day "Much Ado About Nothing", starring major It Girl, Sydney Sweeney, and major Cutie Pie, Glen Powell, and I honestly expected to love it. Unfortunately, I didn't. It's not terrible, but just very average. I don't really see the chemistry between Sweeney and Powell, either, so that's a big negative. They also bicker the entire time and that becomes grating (I know that's part of the Shakespeare play, but I just find it so hard to watch people argue being used as a comedic device). I've really enjoyed Sweeney in almost everything I've seen her in (The White Lotus, Reality, The Voyeurs, Nocturne, even Euphoria - even though I don't like her character), but I think her line delivery is really off here - and it's not really the comedy part because I know she can be funny (her character in The White Lotus is really funny in a very sarcastic way and she nails it). There is a scene that we get a glimpse of a more genuine performance, when Glen Powell has to rip all of his clothes off in the matter of seconds, she starts laughing and it's like a millisecond of her being real, and I just wish she brought that for the whole movie. Can you even imagine not thinking she's pretty, though? I mean, does that producer woman who talked shit about her even have eyes? It's just a common case of a woman being jealous of a much younger, more beautiful woman. I'll never understand it. There's also a way to critique someone without full on lying. Anyway, the film is just filled with really dumb, obvious moments (like the Titanic scene - obviously she's going to fall in and he's going to jump in to rescue her. I also questioned the bad wig that her sister wears, so I assumed something happens to her hair, and YUP it catches on fire). Also, imagine making your entire guestlist fly 22 hours to attend your wedding? What entitled assholes! It's not all bad though. Powell is definitely the highlight. Now he was made for stuff like this. He's hot, charming, non-threatening, and has really good comedic timing (he was my favorite part of Scream Queens, and I think that was before anyone knew who he was!). There are also a few genuine laugh-out-loud moments. But the BEST part was, by far, the after-credits scene with them all singing the most annoying song in the world during different scenes of the movie. It's SO GOOD. It almost made me bump this 2.5 star movie to 3 stars. Almost. 

2. Miller's Girl - WOW. This is genuinely a bad movie. Zero redeeming qualities. There have been plenty of stories like this, whether it's a relationship between an older man and a teenager or student/teacher thing, it's all been done before, so it's weird that this is pretending to be, like, taboo or something? I mean, it's gross, but not surprising or shocking in any way. If you want a taste of how bad it is, the main character's name is "Cairo Sweet". Seriously. I love Jenna Ortega (A LOT), but this is embarrassing. I couldn't even figure out what accent they were all attempting - obviously Southern, but I looked it up and it's supposed to be Tennessee. I can't tell you if it's accurate or not, but I can, for sure, tell you that none of these accents felt natural coming out of any of these actors mouths. And I'm SO disappointed because the friend is, somehow, even worse than Ortega, so I looked up who she was (she seemed vaguely familiar), and it's Pamela Adlon's daughter! I loved her in Blockers, so I'm not going to hold this against her. But neither of these girls feel like real people, and I don't even understand what their motivations are or why they do the dumb things they do. It almost seems like they are hustling, but then they...aren't? It's just written really poorly, so I don't fully blame the actors. Again, if you're curious just how inauthentic these characters are, the teacher (played by Martin Freeman) has his wife listed in his phone as..."wife". UHHH WHAT? Who would do that? I get putting your mom in as "mom" because that's what you call her...you pick up the phone and say "hi mom", but you don't pick up the phone for your wife and say "hi wife". And the teacher is amazed that this student knows who Henry Miller is, as if he's an obscure writer??? I think she's supposed to be in college - they clarify that she's definitely 18, which could be either college or high school. Actually now that I think about it, there is a scene where they are at lockers, so maybe it's high school? But either way, Miller is a very famous person (banned for a lot of schools, but perhaps even more famous because of being banned). It's so stupid! But using Miller as a reference is even more embarrassing for this film because it's so sexually tame and dull, Miller would have, surely, not wanted his name attached to this. 

3. The Stranger (2024) - I'm surprised that I never really saw anyone mention this movie - a 90 minute horror movie, STARRING a well-loved, scream-queen Maika Monroe and Dane DeHaan. I saw it pop up on Hulu and instantly pressed play. And it's good! Not great, but definitely a solid, interesting, original horror movie with great acting and a terrific ending. Apparently it was made in 2020 as a 10 part series for Quibi, but they turned it into a movie instead. It definitely works as a movie, I don't feel like there is enough story here to make a whole series out of. I like that it just starts the story right away with very little build-up. Monroe is a rideshare driver who picks up an unhinged passenger, and things go awry very quickly. First, I'm so old-school when it comes to things like Uber, because I would 100% prefer to take a taxi. I almost always feel uncomfortable in Ubers because (1) the drivers tend to talk to you and I hate it. I don't want to make small talk with a stranger. And there's a difference between a quick pleasant exchange, and continually trying to talk and (2) they are terrible drivers! Anyone with a driver's license can be an Uber driver, and unfortunately, it's very easy to get a license (as you can see by the amount of accidents on the road every day). It's bad enough that I have to be on the road with terrible drivers, but I don't want to be in the car with a terrible driver! Anyway, I can't imagine ever thinking being a rideshare driver, as a woman, would be worth the money. To put yourself alone with strange men over and over again, is a WILD choice (I would rather drive a bear around *winks*). Anyway, the film does spiral a little out of control and becomes really unrealistic (*spoiler* how on Earth does he sneak a kidnapped victim into a police station without anyone noticing? Yes, they explain it, but it's still ridiculous). I think the whole anti-technology aspect is a little over done, too. Like, yes, it is definitely easier to track and stalk people nowadays, but there are definitely still ways to disappear. I think I still forgive it, though, because I like what it's trying to do. I like that the main character is sort of an unreliable narrator (they hint at a background of a mental illness, and also a past event that feels eerily similar - so the audience questions not only her sanity but her character). Maika is great, and DeHaan goes full psychopath fairly realistically. I think it's definitely worth a watch. 

4. LOLA (2022) - I have to clarify which movie I'm talking about, by adding the year, because apparently there is another movie titled Lola released this year on Netflix (which this one is listed as 2022, but not released until 2023). I haven't seen many people talking about this film, either, which is surprising because it's very interesting. It's sort of like The Man in the High Castle - or actually, it really reminded me of that show that NOBODY else watched called Counterpart with JK Simmons (which is SO GOOD!). The plot is different, but still sort of "alternate universe" type story, that can play out in many different ways. This story takes place right before WWII, and is about these two women who build a machine that can intercept future radio broadcasts, so they are able to change the course of history (both politically and musically). They become national heroes by warning of upcoming attacks - seemingly saving the country, but things don't go as expected. I think this part of the story is the less interesting part, because this alternate WWII thing has been done before, but I really like the way they involve music and entertainment - and how it's essential and ingrained into our culture. Her singing "You Really Got Me", before the song was released, is a GREAT scene, but it gets even better that the entire world seems to embrace the song and it becomes an anthem for victory - even replacing the "we can do it" quote on the Rosie the Riveter posters. There's also a great scene where she gets upset because they realize that the changes they made to history erase David Bowie ("there will be somebody else as extraordinary as David Bowie!!" LIES! There's also a funny Letterboxd review about how the cost for the rights to Bowie's songs probably took up 90% of the budget. I don't feel like finding it again, but it made me laugh and is probably true! I mean, the Bowie biopic couldn't even afford the rights to his music! HAHA). Stefanie Martini and Emma Appleton are both great, and also really hot (new crushes, perhaps?). And I think the use of found footage elements are done really well. I like the ending and that it goes to unexpected places. It's also only 80 minutes long, so it never outstays its welcome. Highly recommend! 

5. The Idea of You - TWO rom-coms in one post!!! We are definitely seeing a resurgence. And surprisingly, I liked this a little more than Anyone But You. Maybe because it's a little more cute and whimsical (as opposed to all the constant bickering), but probably because Anne Hathaway is so damn charming. She's perfect for roles like this. I think she's the closest actress of my generation that can hold the moniker "America's Sweetheart" (usually reserved for actresses of the previous generation like Meg Ryan, Julia Roberts, & Sandra Bullock). But I also think that it's a little ridiculous that we're supposed to think she's the "lucky" one in this situation. Like, the whole story is about this 40 something mom who suddenly finds herself dating a 20 something pop star, and we're supposed to feel like she won the lottery, but....he's dating someone who looks like ANNE HATHAWAY, so clearly HE is the lucky one in this situation. It would have made more sense if they had a more normal looking actress in this role. I'm not sure if this was actually based on someone's fanfiction (I heard that, but didn't look into it), but the story is actually terrible for a multitude of reasons. First, obviously it is a popular fantasy to be in a relationship with a famous pop star, but it should be a young person fantasy. I feel like once you hit a certain age, ideas like that go away and you should start to look at life a little more realistically, otherwise you're setting yourself up for a very disappointing later life. But that's not happening anymore - stan culture has taken over and obsession with celebrities is lasting well into the minds of women in their 50s (internet sensation Club Chalamet (Chamalet) is a perfect example). And I say women, because I think it's is largely women that have this fascination. I think it's normal to have favorite celebrities, crushes, etc., but it's the true obsession that I'm referring to. Where people become delusional into thinking that this story could happen to them. Second, the reality of being with a pop star, as shown in this film, is not as glamourous as one would imagine. I would absolutely hate it. I like my privacy way too much, and the idea of someone judging everything I do, say, wear, etc., would make me want to kill myself. But, again, this has become normalized and also self-inflicting, by social media, because people post every little part of their day for engagement and attention, and then get upset when the internet isn't kind to them. And third, and this is going to come off a little ageist, but I think it's extremely selfish for a woman in her 40s (one who already has an almost adult child and doesn't want more kids) to pursue a relationship with a man in his 20s. Like, hook up, for sure, but a relationship? Having him fall in love with you? I would be so worried that he would want children, and I would never want to take that option away from someone. It's the biggest reason that I dated my husband for 6 years before agreeing to marriage, because I was nervous he would change his mind and want kids (he's 7 years younger than me). But, he's still adamant that it's not what he wants - and I feel like making that decision when he's 34 was more rationally thought out than when he was 28. And last, as a woman in her 40s, I imagine that a 24 year old pop star would be terrible in bed (sorry, not sorry). Anyway, those are my thoughts on this story, but again, I still found myself entertained. Hathaway has never looked better - and I've never been more jealous of someone my age. And the thing is, she looks super hot but she also looks her age (she could pass for younger, definitely), but she's just super cool, chic, and just naturally gorgeous. I'm not really familiar with the guy in this - but people talk about him all the time on my twitter feed as if he's super hot, and I just don't see it. Apparently he was in the most recent Cinderella remake and I was not a fan (I wrote "I don't know the actor that plays the prince, but he's not hot, can't sing, and is so unmemorable that if you showed me a picture of him I highly doubt I would recognize him"). He's fine in this, but I think Hathaway is definitely pulling most of the weight. The ending is a little weak (first, I have no idea why SHE is apologizing to him, other than the fact that women apologize for everything even if they aren't at fault). It should have just ended with them not together, even though I realize that's not the norm for a "romantic" movie, but I would have liked it better if they both moved on to more suitable partners and had their "happily ever after" separately. It's also too long. Romcoms should be 90-100 minutes tops, and this is just shy of 2 hours. It's totally unnecessary. OH AND how dare they use Fiona's "Paper Bag" in this setting??? It's my second favorite song of all-time, so I love hearing it in a movie, BUT - the song is about being too much of a mess to let someone love you "these hands are too shaky to hold" etc. There is the quick line "I thought he was a man but he was just a little boy", but that's about how men don't grow up mentally or emotionally as fast as women do, not AN ACTUAL AGE issue. LOL). 

Thoughts on 5 New TV Shows

1. The Regime - I liked this show, for the most part, but from what I've read, I might be in the minority on that. I understand the criticism but I think it's just being misunderstood. I think more were expecting a political satire in the same vein as Veep, and this never really hits those notes at all. I appreciate that it tries to do something a bit different - it's obvious political satire, but it also tells a somewhat unbelievable truth about how people come in to power and how they are able to abuse this power. The first two episodes are definitely weird because it's hard to figure out exactly what it's trying to say and it all seems a bit ludicrous. But once I got into the groove of it, and took it for face-value as a play on many famous political figures like Margaret Thatcher, Queen Elizabeth and the Romanovs (with Matthias Shoenaerts clearly playing a Rasputin type character), I started to really enjoy it. It never goes the expected route, and therefore is consistently oddly interesting. Shoenaerts is incredible in this role. Winslet, on the other hand, is very Kate Winslet. I find her to be one of the most inconsistent A-list actresses, and those inconsistencies often exist within the same project. Similar to how her Boston accent dips in and out throughout Mare of Easttown, here she attempts a weird lisp-slash-lip droop, but only sometimes. It's really heavy during certain scenes and then barely noticeable in others. It's like she got too tired to keep it up and hoped that nobody would notice (BUT I DO!). I still love her and have since Heavenly Creatures, but I don't think she's as great of an actress as the awards praise suggests. The character, though, is very good - she creates this eccentric, cold-hearted, disconnected from reality character that somehow I still felt a little bit sorry for. Andrea Riseborough is severely underused, and I wish her story arc was a larger focus in the series. It's also got some funny stuff - when the kids ask questions and she says "I knew I smelt something" (perfect line delivery) and the whole scene with the portrait he does of her and her reaction to it is hilarious. I just really enjoy how high stakes it becomes in the end and was definitely entertained for its entirety. 

2. Under the Bridge - Yet another true crime series that everyone is claiming is "incredible", but I don't really see anything that stands out from every other true crime series about a murdered teenager. I like Riley Keough, and this performance might push her into Emmy territory, but that's probably the only really positive thing I can say about it. OH WAIT, actually the best performance in the show is Archie Panjabi - she has a few standout moments from the show that really hit. I really want to like Lily Gladstone, but so far, I'm not impressed (with her acting). I thought she was very one-note in KotFM, and I don't even remember her in Certain Women. She is lifeless in this - I have not seen a single emotion occur on her face. I honestly find it creepy. I'm also just not sure that this story needs to be told. This girl, who was brutally murdered by her peers, also lied about her own father molesting her just because she wanted to fit in with her new friends. With it being so difficult for victims of abuse to be believed, I find these stories (while based on a true story) unnecessary to tell in this current environment. Obviously, I have sympathy for this girl (and more so for her family), and she didn't deserve to die for her lies, but there are plenty of similar stories to be told that don't involve a young girl lying about abuse. I also find the romance really forced - are they supposed to have chemistry??? It's hard to watch. There's still two more episodes for me to watch, but so far, I'm just not really impressed and I feel like it's missing a lot of things that can make it more interesting. Like, we don't really know who these characters are aside from in relation to this mystery. Keough's character mentions her brother dying and she obviously has a lot of PTSD from that and a disconnect from her family, but it would have benefitted from exploring this more instead of showing the teen girls being bitchy teens for the 100th time. And her trying to connect with them, is grating - no teens would hang out with a 34 year old woman; especially rebellious teens. I mean, she's the same age that my mom was when I was 16. 

3. Ripley - Just like with Under the Bridge, I find the hyperbole for this a bit eye-rolling. There's a lot I like about it, but it becomes SO boring. It was hard to get through 8 episodes of this. I will say that it is probably the most well-made television show of the year. Stunningly beautiful shots galore. Obviously inspired by classic Hollywood films, Hitchcock, and Italian neo-realism, it's a love letter to films, even though it's a series. I'm not usually a fan of modern productions using black & white cinematography, but this is the exception. There are just so many moments that I sat at awe at how beautiful it is - the scene in which he's trying to get rid of the boat, in particular, is just excellent, from the sound, to the pace of it, to the blocking. I also really like the shots of the Italian newspaper that fade into the English translation that become a big part of the latter episodes. I guess my disappointment is largely with the cast. I just think the whole thing is completely miscast especially compared to the original film. The Talented Mr. Ripley is definitely among my favorite movies, but I also read the book last year and was surprised at how much depth and story is built into this universe that can be explored. I appreciate that this is an adaption from the book that feels very different than the film. If you're going to remake something, it needs to feel completely different, otherwise what's the point? But, I don't think Andrew Scott has even a tenth of the charm that Matt Damon had for this role, and that is a HUGE aspect of his character. It's the reason that he was able to grift so well. And Jude Law as Dickie Greenleaf is one of the hottest men in cinematic history. He oozes sex and intrigue, and we (the audience) completely understood why Ripley becomes obsessed with him and his life. I'm interested in Johnny Flynn's career because he's always completely different in every role (sometimes becoming unrecognizable) and I respect that. But, he's certainly no Jude Law at peak Jude Law (peak Jude Law was from 1997 to 2006). Dakota Fanning is fine in this role, I guess. I think Gwen was the weak link casting of the film, so Fanning is a slight step up, but I still see her as a child so it's a hard adjustment, personally. But perhaps one of the worst casting decisions I've ever witnessed IN MY ENTIRE LIFE, is the role of Freddie Miles for this series. Like, I'm not exaggerating, it's a hate crime. In the book and the movie, Miles is a larger than life character - THE life of the party and played to perfection by the late great Philip Seymour Hoffman. He was also, somewhat of a threatening presence for Ripley. I understand that they wanted to go in a different direction, but the direction they chose is baffling. I think you have to watch it to understand *just* how bad it is, but I think the biggest problem is that this person can't act. I didn't know who they were, but they seemed familiar so I looked it up - and it's Sting's child (and they look just like him). They are also non-binary. Good for them. But it just doesn't work for this character. I couldn't help but see this person trying so hard to come off as masculine, with this terrible haircut, and bad line delivery. They also look like a child, so certainly not a threatening presence at all for Ripley. I honestly feel bad for whomever decided they were right for this role. It's like setting someone up to fail. Anyway. I also found myself not paying attention to whole chunks of the series because I already know the story so well. It feels like it drags a bit and gets repetitive, so I would have probably enjoyed a 5 or 6 episode version better than the 8 episodes. 

4. Fallout - I've only watched the first three episodes, so far, so I don't have a whole lot to say yet (it's difficult to get my husband to watch stuff. Even stuff he likes!). As someone who has never played the game nor is familiar with the story, they do a wonderful job of making it completely accessible. But, I also have my husband (a big fan of the game) answering my many questions. And my first question was "UHHHH are they all inbred????". I was definitely not expecting that to be part of this plot (nor was I expecting that to be part of the plot of this hugely popular video game series???). I liked the first episode well enough. It reminded me a lot of the Westworld series (which Jonathon Nolan also created). I like the main cast - the girl from Yellowjackets, who reminds me of a young American version of Marion Cotillard, is, once again, fantastic. Walton Goggins always brings everything to every role, and is one of those actors that everybody loves. And the other guy, who I don't recognize from anything, is also strong (I'm being lazy again, I don't feel like looking up names). He also resembles Denzel Washington more than Denzel's own son! The soundtrack is also a major highlight - and feels really different for a show like this. But the next two episodes sort of have me doubting it as a series. It's starting to remind me of other shows like The Walking Dead and The Last of Us and I'm sort of over it. There's just nothing that has really hooked me yet. But I did start shouting out types of shrimp when I saw the guy who plays Bubba in Forrest Gump in a small scene. My husband was like "what's happening, what are you doing?", "IT'S BUBBA!" and then he joined me and we spent like 5 minutes naming types of shrimp. Poor guy. I'm sure he probably still gets people yelling types of shrimp at him. It's like when I met the guy who plays Fun Bobby on Friends when I worked in LA, and he said he wished he never did the role because people yell "Fun Bobby" at him every single day of his life and he had a hard time getting other acting gigs because of it. Anyway, I'm sidetracked, again. I do like this show, but so far, it's all just very expected. Unless it really starts to shock me, it's probably going to be a chore for me to watch the rest. 

5. Baby Reindeer - I did not know what to expect with this - I just kept hearing everyone talk about this crazy new Netflix show about a stalker, oddly titled Baby Reindeer. It was everywhere, so I added it to my list AND moved it to the top (pushing Sugar with COLIN FARRELL - don't worry, I will be watching with my next round of new shows!). It is, indeed, worth the hype. I watched it all in the span of two days. I think the biggest success of this is the representation of the imperfect victim. There are so many stories of abuse, rape, etc., in which we question how anyone could possibly get themselves into that situation, and I think this story tries to grapple with this question. The psychology of the victim that is explored here is done so well, because victims of violence often blame themselves so much so that a history of self-loathing and self-destruction is created (often leading to more abuse as either a victim again, or a perpetrator). They let this hatred of themselves consume them until there's nothing of their previous self left. And I think a lot of stories are too scared to go there. It's just too complicated of a narrative to get right. The only way to make it successful is to tell it from experience, and that's what this story is. Comedian Richard Gadd tells his story with deeply raw honesty and bravery. We don't get many stories about male victims of sexual violence (unless it's set in a prison), and Gadd has taken a really strong first step. The fourth episode, that reveals this part of his past, is such an incredible showcase of the intricacies of sexual abuse and how it fucks with your head in such nonsensical ways. There is also an exercise in perspective that's happening to - because we obviously only see his perspective, and as the victim, I don't feel like we see that often (I feel like stories now try really hard to show the abuser side as well- either a psychological inquiry, or as a push for the victim's narrative). Not that we don't see some insight into his stalker - we do, but it's still all from his perspective and his own research into her past. It's certainly not an easy watch, nor is it ever black & white. There is an empathy shown for his stalker, which is how he finds himself in the situation to begin with. I do have a few critiques (because of course I do!). I think it gets a little repetitive, especially with the constant narrating. There is something to be said with "show, don't tell", and I usually don't like having a narrator as a device, but it does work here. There's just a little too much of it. And, while the monologue that he does is heartbreaking, it's also unnecessary to show the whole thing - we just watched the entire story and now we have to hear him repeat it back to us?? That's it though, otherwise it's a pretty perfect show.